From the Breaking News thread, here's the background to
Star Moron gab13by13's disgusting post:
IN DEFENSE OF JUSTICE THOMAShttps://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/05/in-defense-of-justice-thomas.phpPower Line blog
... In 1997, Justice Thomas and his wife brought their great nephew to live with them. They agreed to take in this young child much as Justice Thomas’s grandparents had done for him and his brother in 1955. ...
Justice Thomas and his wife made immeasurable personal and financial sacrifices and poured every ounce of their lives and hearts into giving their great nephew a chance to succeed. In the summer of 2006, the Thomases were struggling to find a school where they could send their great nephew. In discussing these challenges with their dear friends, Harlan and Kathy Crow, Harlan recommended that the Thomases consider one more option: sending their great nephew to Randolph Macon Academy. Harlan had attended Randolph Macon, and he thought the school would be a good fit.
Harlan had financially supported Randolph Macon since the 1980s, and funded scholarships for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Harlan offered to pay the first year of Justice Thomas’s great nephew’s tuition in 2006, and that payment went directly to the school. Harlan Crow’s Office confirmed that he did not pay the great nephew’s tuition for any other year at Randolph Macon.
...
Harlan Crow’s tuition payments made directly to these schools on behalf of Justice Thomas’s great nephew did not constitute a reportable gift. Justice Thomas was not required to disclose the tuition payments made directly to Randolph Macon and the Georgia school on behalf of his great nephew because the definition of a “dependent child” under the Ethics in Government Act (5 U.S.C. 13101 (2)) does not include a “great nephew.” It is limited to a “son, daughter, stepson or stepdaughter.” ... neither Harlan Crow, nor his company, had any business before the Supreme Court.
For Fair Use reasons, I did not quote to part of the article that mentions a single year that the great nephew spent at a school in GA, the tuition paid by Crow directly to the school. So this kerfuffle has to do with two years of tuition paid by Crow (out of 12 or 13 years), when he had no business before the USSC, that by the Ethics in Government Act was not reportable.
Progs' attempt to Himalayanize a mole hill lacks an actual mole hill. Unsurprisingly.
So Clarence and Ginni Thomas (apparently) rescued their great nephew from a bad situation, strained their resources to give him an education, and a wealthy friend paid two years of the boy's tuition at private schools. The rich friend did not have a case before the Supreme Court, he paid the tuition directly to the school, and under the Federal Law to which USSC justices must conform, the gifts of a year in the schools for the great nephew did not have to be reported.
So the "crimes" are that Clarence Thomas is off the Dem Plantation, and the great nephew was given the education that could keep him out of prison and off social programs.
