Lawsuit To Be Filed Accusing Trump of Illegal Acts

No one should be surprised over the fact that a lawsuit will be filed today accusing Donald Trump of illegal and unconstitutional activities, in particular, his violation of the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.  It goes without saying that I hope that the lawsuit is successful and that perhaps under the subpoena powers afforded by litigation, Trump's tax returns and other information he seeks to keep hidden will come to light.  The New York Times looks at this welcomed development.  Here are highlights:

A team of prominent constitutional scholars, Supreme Court litigators and former White House ethics lawyers intends to file a lawsuit Monday morning alleging that President Trump is violating the Constitution by allowing his hotels and other business operations to accept payments from foreign governments.

The lawsuit is among a barrage of legal actions against the Trump administration that have been initiated or are being planned by major liberal advocacy organizations. Such suits are among the few outlets they have to challenge the administration now that Republicans are in control of the government.

In the new case, the lawyers argue that a provision in the Constitution known as the Emoluments Clause amounts to a ban on payments from foreign powers like the ones to Mr. Trump’s companies. They cite fears by the framers of the Constitution that United States officials could be corrupted by gifts or payments.

The suit, which will not seek any monetary damages, will ask a federal court in New York to order Mr. Trump to stop taking payments from foreign government entities. Such payments, it says, include those from patrons at Trump hotels and golf courses, as well as loans for his office buildings from certain banks controlled by foreign governments, and leases with tenants like the Abu Dhabi tourism office, a government enterprise.

The legal team filing the lawsuit includes Laurence H. Tribe, a Harvard constitutional scholar; Norman L. Eisen, an Obama administration ethics lawyer; and Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the law school at the University of California, Irvine. Among the others are Richard W. Painter, an ethics counsel in the administration of George W. Bush; Mr. Gupta, a Supreme Court litigator who has three cases pending before the court; and Zephyr Teachout, a Fordham University law professor and former congressional candidate who has been studying and writing about the Emoluments Clause for nearly a decade.

Ms. Teachout said the one place of potential concern is a nation like China, which rents space at Trump Tower in New York and is a major lender to an office building in New York that he controls in part.

Foreign governments, Ms. Teachout and other ethics expert warn, could rent out rooms in Trump hotels as a way to send a message to the Trump family. “If you think other countries are not going to try to leverage relationships with Trump’s companies to influence trade or military policy, that is naïve,” she said.

Mr. Eisen said the legal team intended to use the lawsuit to try to get a copy of Mr. Trump’s federal tax returns, which are needed to properly assess what income or other payments or loans Mr. Trump has received from foreign governments.

Democrats Launch Attack Ad Against Cuccinelli

This blog has looked at the highly unusual and unexplained situation where a staff attorney of the Virginia Attorney General's office was offering legal assistance and advise to two energy companies being sued by Virginia residents for allegedly cheating them out of hundreds of thousands of dollars in gas royalties.  The litigation is private litigation and does not involve the Commonwealth of Virginia or any state agencies.  Hence, there is no outward reason for the AG office's involvement.  Or is there? One of the energy company is an affiliate of a company that donated over $114,000 to Ken Cuccinelli's gubernatorial campaign.  Quite appropriately, the Democrat National Committee is running an ad asking that this matter be investigated.  The ad is above.

As noted before, I am well acquainted with the oil and gas industry and was with a large law firm with an extensive oil and gas practice and worked on lease litigation and royalty disputes.  I also was in-house counsel for a large oil company.  I know of nothing from this background that would justify the Attorney General's office being involved in a private lawsuit over leases and royalty payments.  Absolutely nothing.   Nothing that is other than a pay back to a large campaign contributor.  Cuccinelli is a menace and must be defeated in November.   

Law School Applications Continue to Fall

Apparently more college age individuals are waking up to what many attorneys of many years have known for years:  The legal profession sucks.  High stress, much lower pay than most people assume, and horrible hours are the norm in private practice.  Not that government positions and in-house positions are sweetness and light either.  All of which explains why attorneys have among the highest alcohol and drug abuse problems and a high suicide rate.  As a consequence, especially given the insanely high expense of going to law school, applications to law schools are down for the third year in a row.  The Washington Post looks at this trend.  Here are highlights:

The number of people applying to U.S. law schools dropped nationwide for the third year in a row, prompting some law schools to slash the size of their entering classes.

As of May 17, about 55,760 people had applied to American Bar Association-accredited law schools for the 2013-14 school year — down 13.4 percent from 2012, according to data compiled by the Law School Admission Council.

Law school enrollment is also trending downward, with 48,700 people entering their first year of law school in fall 2011 — 7 percent below the previous year, and the first significant decline in a decade. The council has yet to compile nationwide enrollment data for fall 2012.

Last fall, George Washington University Law School cut its number of first-year law students from 474 to 398, the smallest in a decade and the second year in a row the school reduced its class size.

The drop in applications follows a period in which too many new lawyers chased too few jobs. The 2008 economic collapse forced many of the nation’s largest law firms to dramatically reduce the number of first-year lawyers they hired in 2009 and 2010. At the same time, law school enrollment continued to climb — hitting a 10-year high of 52,500 in fall 2010 — leading to the lowest levels of employment for new graduates since 1996, a growing proportion of them carrying loans of $120,000 or more.

Cornblatt said growing concerns about the legal job market and law school debt are driving away less-serious potential applicants who a few years ago might have been eager to enter law school to weather the recession.

“There’s been so much noise about the legal job market and how tough it is, whether it’s worth the tuition and borrowing all that money,” he said. “That group of people who weren’t as committed just aren’t applying now. . . . The rest of world won’t weep over fewer people wanting to be lawyers, but for people like me who do admissions, it creates challenges. There are fewer top applicants and the same number of law schools fighting over a smaller pool of highly qualified applicants than four years ago.”

 Hopefully, the trend continues.  There are far too many young attorneys fighting over jobs and willing to stretch the ethical rules to pander to clients.  It's not a pretty picture.

Cuccinelli Financial Report Turns up Questions about Donor

Click on image to enlarge

It seems that soon to be crowned GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli just can't having ethical questions surround him, especially when money is involved - e.g., his long failure to disclose financial holdings in Star Scientific..  His latest financial report reflects an apparently nonexistent radio station as one of his donors.  NBC Decision 12 has details on the question of who actually gave the money to Kookinelli.  Here are highlights:. 

The financial forms are in from the first quarter of 2013 and we are starting to get a sense of who is funding the campaigns of both Ken Cuccinelli and Terry McAuliffe. 

There are some interesting take aways. McAuliffe has a significant Union presence on his financial disclosure report. This is not a surprise for a Democratic candidate. It is worth noting though because of Virginia's right to work status.

Cuccinelli's donor base was, as expected much different than McAuliffe's. His biggest haul came from the Republican Governor's Association which ponied up $1 million, almost half of his entire report. Cuccinelli also took a $25,000 check from Foster Friess, a major conservative donor during the 2012 presidential campaign. Friess, who was a big supporter of Cuccinelli ally Rick Santorum, drew some heat when we went on cable news and said that in his day pregnancy was prevented when "gals put it (an aspirin) between their knees and it wasn't that costly."

Also in Cuccinelli's report is a $2,500 contribution from a company that calls itself "KHSE LLC". KHSE lists their address as 6915 Wolf Run Shoals Road Fairfax Station, VA. They claim to be a radio station. The trouble is there is no such thing as a radio station called KHSE anywhere in Virginia or Fairfax Station. 

A Google search of KHSE doesn't turn up much either, especially in Virginia. In fact the only KHSE listed as a radio station anywhere on the internet is a Wikipedia entry for a station that doesn't appear to be broadcasting.

According to the Cuccinelli campaign officials, much like the McAuliffe situation, it is a case of an honest mistake. In this situation, the donor provided the correct information and the campaign incorrectly assumed it was a radio station. They submitted their filing information as such.   A spokesperson for the campaign said that KHSE is actually an investment firm not a radio station. They plan to fix the filing.

However, the campaign could not provide any information as to who runs the company. It is also difficult to find any other information about KHSE the investment firm either.  .  .  .  .   Much like our search of State Coroporation Commission Records of KHSE the radio station, nothing turned up in a search for KHSE the investment firm.

Lawmakers Call on Cuccinelli to Resign Attorney General

First for some personal background: when he successfully ran for attorney general, Mark Earley and I were members of the same law firm and I saw first hand how running a statewide campaign meant that he was nearly never in the office or in court handling client matters.  It was campaign mode 24/7 and the rest of the firm carried his case load and we basically helped underwrite his campaign.  Ditto when he unsuccessfully ran for governor after resigning from the office of attorney general. Fast forward to 2013.  Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli to date has refused to resign his position as attorney general claiming he can do his job and campaign at the same time.  Excuse me, but that is simply something that is impossible and Kookinelli is a liar if he claims otherwise.  I have seen the reality first hand.

Let's be blunt: Kookinelli is simply trying to make Virginia taxpayers underwrite his campaign in an amount equal to his salary.  If Kookinelli is too insane and toxic to have any major law firm put him on its payroll as former gubernatorial candidates have had done, that should be his problem and not force many of us to underwrite his campaign by paying his salary while he campaigns full time.  In recognition of this reality that is obvious to anyone sentient, a dozen members of the Virginia General Assembly have sent Kookinelli a letter demanding that he resign his position.  One can only hope that the media gets all over this conflict of interest and inappropriate conduct on Cuccinelli's part (perhaps a petition need to be launched?).  Here are highlights from a Richmond Times-Dispatch column:

A dozen Democratic lawmakers on Friday sent a letter to Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli asking him to resign his office because he is running for governor. The letter signed by four state senators and eighth members of the House of Delegates, argues that Virginia deserves a full-time attorney general and notes that the previous six attorneys general resigned before their terms expired in recognition that running for governor creates too many demands on fulfilling the duties of the office.

 

The letter even quotes current governor and former attorney general Bob McDonnell’s remarks in 2009 at the time of his resignation: ”The office is a very difficult job. It demands a full-time attorney general to do the hard work that’s required.”

Of course, in most cases, attorneys general typically slide into a comfortable jobs at politically connected major law firms — where they are given time to pursue their political ambitions while making salaries that far exceed their public service wages.

In a brief interview Friday, the Republican gubernatorial nominee he said he intended to keep his word and downplayed the difficulty in public service and political multi-tasking. . . . . “It’s not a tradition that I think ever should have developed in Virginia,” he added, referring to the practice of resigning. “I made a promise when I ran four years ago… and I’m going to do it.” 

As for his "promise" four years ago, Kookinelli assured voters he wasn't going to do what he is now doing.  His sole focus supposedly was going to be serving as attorney general.  As is always the case, Kookinelli believes he is above the laws and traditions that govern everyone else.  In that regard, he's a typical Christofascists.  This man needs to be defeated.  He is a clear and present danger to Virginia's future and the rights of many Virginians.  Should Bill Bolling mount an independent campaign, I might even make a contribution just to keep Kookinelli out of the Governor's Mansion.  The man is insane.

 

Ken Cuccinelli To Contraception Opponents: "Go to Jail'' Rather than Obey Law

In blog posts and VEER Magazine columns I have endeavored to educate people about the utter lunatic level extremism of Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli, the all but crowned GOP for Governor of Virginia.  Many still refuse to open their eyes to the fact that Kookinelli belongs in an insane asylum rather than the Governor's Mansion.  Now, Kookinelli has made statements that ought to underscore this reality - and the fact that Kookinelli needs to be removed from the office of Attorney General:  he is advising opponents of the contraception mandate provision of federal laws and regulations rather than obey the law.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Virginia's top law enforcement officer is encouraging citizens to defy the law and go to jail rather than comply with the law.  Politico looks at this latest batshitery from Cuccinelli.  Here are excerpts:

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, the presumptive GOP gubernatorial nominee and a rising national figure on the right, told an Iowa-based radio show Wednesday night that opponents of a federal mandate for contraception coverage should be willing to “go to jail” to fight the law.

Cuccinelli, who also addressed the Iowa Republican Party’s Lincoln Day Dinner last spring, told conservative radio host Steve Deace that he strongly supports the lawsuit by Hobby Lobby Stores against the Affordable Care Act’s requirements for contraception coverage.

Cuccinelli recounted an exchange with his own bishop in which he counseled the cleric to embrace civil disobedience: “My local bishop said, ‘Well, you know I told a group I’m ready to go to jail.’ And I said, ‘Bishop, don’t take this personally: You need to go to jail.’”

Though Deace’s show is based in Iowa, it is syndicated nationally and has affiliates in Virginia. Deace endorsed Newt Gingrich in the 2012 primaries.

The Cuccinelli campaign said that the interview was totally unrelated to the attorney general’s unexpected absence at Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell’s Wednesday night State of the Commonwealth address. 

What makes the situation even more outrageous is that while he is gallivanting around the country and around Virginia, Cuccinelli is drawing his full salary as Attorney General.  Cuccinelli needs to either resign or be removed from office.

Christian Post Provides Platform for Anti-Gay Charlatan Paul Cameron

There are many anti-gay organizations that work over time to depict LGBT individuals as mentally ill if not outright disease ridden.  Organizations like - some rightly registered as hate groups - Family Research Council, American Family Association, Mission America, and Focus on the Family drip with malice in the vileness of their false and fabricated propaganda.  Organizations like these knowingly  and deliberately use and/or repackage the long discredited and fraudulent "research" of Paul Cameron (pictured at left), a true charlatan in my opinion.  Thus, one would have thought that a arguably legitimate outlet like the Christian Post would avoid giving a false legitimacy to Cameron and his bogus works.  Here's the headline carried by the Christian Post: "Research Group Claims Gays Have Mental, Physical Problems."   Worse yet, here is a sampling of the batshitery contained in the article:
  

The Family Research Institute (FRI), an organization driving research into questions relating to the traditional family unit, has challenged a widely approved and circulated study accepted in many psychological circles that claims to prove that homosexuality is not a mental disorder.

"The main motivation is that if you look across the data sets you see that homosexuals have a host of mental problems, disproportionate physical problems, they don't live as long, and they are disproportionately involved in drug abuse and criminality," Dr. Paul Cameron of FRI, who led the analysis, told The Christian Post on Tuesday. "That would seem to indicate that that is a lifestyle that may reasonably be considered mentally disturbed – [a] disorder. Yet, it isn't."

FRI's investigation concerns a 1957 study of 30 male homosexuals conducted by Dr. Evelyn Hooker that used a number of psychiatry tests to determine whether homosexuality can be considered a mental problem. Hooker's research was claimed to show that it cannot, eventually prompting the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1973.

FRI's close research, however, led the organization to believe in a different outcome.  .  .  .  .  "It is surprising that such a wildly defective study, and one that actually proved the exact opposite of what it claimed to have proved has survived so long," he concluded.

What the Christian Post fails to note is that Cameron has been expelled from every legitimate association that he ever belonged to for either unethical conduct or falsifying research.  In fact, in more lawsuit where Cameron was used by anti-gay forces, the court's opinion notes that both Cameron and his testimony was fraudulent.   Timothy Kincaid at Box Turtle Bulletin has a great take down of Cameron and ultimately the Christian Post for providing a total charlatan the cloak of legitimacy.  Here are excerpts:

They should know better. They really should know better.  By this point, everyone in media from Mother Jones to the National Review, from the Catholic Register to the American Atheist Magazine, everyone should know that quoting Dr. Paul Cameron will bring embarrassment and make you the subject of public ridicule.

After Cameron was booted from the Nebraska Psychological Association and the American Psychological Association for distorting the research of others, it should have been obvious. After Bill Bennett stupidly relied on Cameron (and had to publicly apologize), it should have been obvious. After the Lincoln police called his bluff about a “four-year-old boy who has had his genitals almost severed from his body at Gateway [mall] in a restroom with a homosexual act”, it should have been obvious. After making a complete fool of himself in Sacha Baron Cohen’s mockumentary film Brüno, it should have been obvious.

I guess it isn’t obvious. Or not to the Christian Post. They think that Cameron has discovered that gay folks are mentally ill.

A three minute Google of Hooker would illustrate just how distorted that statement is from reality. Another three minute Google of Cameron would illustrate just how dishonest (and perhaps deranged) that Cameron’s claims have been over the years.  They really should know better.

Kincaid is right - everyone should know that Cameron is a liar and fraud.  Yet time and time again, the "godly Christian" folk feign ignorance.  Once I even had Robert Knight and Peter LaBarbera make this type of  ridiculous claim.  I sent them detail information and documentation on Cameron and what did they do?  They went on deliberately lying and disseminating utterly fraudulent anti-gay propaganda.

Anti-Immigrant Sheriff Paul Babeu Threatened Male Mexican Boyfriend With Deportation

In yet another expose of a far right politician as being secretly gay, the Phoenix New Times has coverage on the secret same sex relationship of Pinal Sheriff Paul Babeu - and the threats that Babeu allegedly made to his lover if the lover every revealed their relationship. It's yet another example of conservative hypocrisy soaring off the charts. To make the story even more fun, Sheriff Babeu supposedly also had a profile on adam4adam.com. For the life of me, I cannot understand how someone can be posing as a far right ideologue and at the same time leading a completely double life. Yes, I was in the closet for years, but I never acted upon my orientation. And when I finally came to terms with it - or at least started that process - I clean about it. Here are highlights on the hypocrisy and double standard of Mr. Babeu:

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu — who became the face of Arizona border security nationally after he started stridently opposing illegal immigration — threatened his Mexican ex-lover with deportation when the man refused to promise never to disclose their years-long relationship, the former boyfriend and his lawyer tell New Times.

The latest of the alleged threats were made through Babeu's personal attorney, who's also running the sheriff's campaign for Congress in District 4, the ex-lover says.

He says lawyer Chris DeRose demanded he sign an agreement that he would never breathe a word about the affair. But Jose (New Times is withholding his last name because Babeu and his attorney have challenged his legal status) refused.

Melissa Weiss-Riner, Jose's attorney, confirms her client's account. She says she spoke directly to the sheriff's lawyer, DeRose, about the Babeu camp's threats that Jose could be deported if he "revealed the relationship." She says DeRose falsely claimed that Jose's visa had expired. "Jose came to our firm because he felt he was being intimidated, and he was in fear for his life," Weiss-Riner says. "He wanted his legal rights protected."

"If what [Babeu's attorney] says is correct [about Jose's being illegal], either the sheriff had a long relationship with someone he knew was undocumented, while all the time being Mr. Bluster about the border and using it for political gain," or he threatened to deport someone he just broke up with, Merritt says. "That's just the worst kind of hypocrisy." She adds that federal immigration-enforcement agents have better things to do than "take care of Babeu's boyfriends."

Antonio Bustamante, a criminal defense attorney and immigration activist, tells New Times that if the allegations against Babeu are true, "To use a position of authority . . . and make legal threats opens a Pandora's box of ethics issues for any law enforcement person or any elected person. In this case, he's both."

On October 23, Babeu announced that he was considering a run to represent Arizona's newly formed 4th Congressional District, which includes parts of La Paz, Yavapai, Mohave, and Pinal counties. (Heinz announced recently that he's also running for Congress — to fill Gabrielle Giffords' vacated seat.)

Babeu has since confirmed that he's running, and polls of voters in the extremely conservative congressional district show him with a strong lead over Republican opponents Paul Gosar and Ron Gould — the latter of whom is campaigning on a strong family-values ticket.

There's much more in the New Times story. And, meanwhile on Babeu's congressional campaign website the main title is: "It’s time to send a true conservative to Washington, DC." The website also states: "The assault on our country, our constitution and our freedom coming from Washington, DC is unacceptable."

Somehow I suspect that Babeu's political prospects just took a major hit.

Is Eric Cantor Trying to Kill the Congressional Insider Trading Ban?

Living in Virginia we have many embarrassing politicians. Indeed, the entire GOP delegation to the Virginia General Assembly largely qualifies as knuckle dragging Neanderthals with a penchant for mindlessly following the dictates handed down by the Christofascists at The Family Foundation. But when one factors in sleaze, the Congressman Eric Cantor has few rivals when it comes to being an embarrassment to Virginians. I've often speculated that Cantor would sell his own mother for the right price - which would likely be an amount equal to pocket change. As readers may recall, when the nation was on the brink of defaulting on its obligations, Cantor had invested in funds that would have sky rocketed in value if a default had occurred. Thus, it's little surprise that some believe that Cantor is working to kill a bill that would bar members of Congress from engaging in insider trading. A practice that would any of the rest of us - even the real Martha Stewart, not the boyfriend - in prison. Here are highlights from Think Progress on Cantor's latest ethically challenged agenda:

During his State of the Union address, President Obama said “send me a bill that bans insider trading by members of Congress; I will sign it tomorrow. Let’s limit any elected official from owning stocks in industries they impact.” The remark stemmed from a 60 Minutes investigation showing that House Financial Services Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-AL) profited from information he received in private briefings during the economic crisis of 2008.

The Senate, in a rare display of bipartisanship, opened debate on an insider trading ban by a vote of 93-2. However, the bill has since become bogged down under a sea of unrelated amendments.

Over in the House, meanwhile, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) — who reportedly blocked Bachus from bringing up a ban on congressional insider trading in committee — wants to expand the legislation to include bans on other sorts of transactions, such as land deals. UCLA Law Prof. Stephen Bainbridge notes that this is likely an attempt by Cantor to kill the bill by making it so overly broad that no one will vote for it:

[Cantor's] now trying to extend the STOCK Act “so it includes land deals and other types of transactions and not just stock trades.” Classic taking a good idea too far. The problem is insider trading in stocks, not insider trading in land deals. Cantor obviously hopes that including a vast array of economic activity within the bill, exposing members of Congress to disclosure obligations and other restrictions, as well as increasing their liability exposure, will make the bill sufficiently unpopular so as to prevent its passage.

Cantor is a despicable sleaze. One has to wonder what's in the water in his district that causes his constituents to vote for someone who, in my opinion, is such a douche bag.

Black Pastors, Marriage Equality, and NOM’s Money

I have lamented frequently about the manner in which many black pastors are routinely co-opted to act as water carriers for white Christianist organization which, if one knows accurate history, are the successors to the same far right Christians who supported slavery in the 1850's and 1860's and who later supported the Jim Crow laws and segregation. Here in Virginia, the toxic bigots at The Family Foundation ("TFF") routinely manipulate black pastors to support TFF's anti-gay agenda as if they were trained circus dogs. It's disgusting not to mention an extreme dishonor of blacks who fought against these very same Christianist for equality under the nation's civil laws. Now, Alvin McEwen has a post at Pam's House Blend that speculates that these very same pastors such as Rev. Patrick Wooden (pictured at right) are perhaps being paid by the National Organization for Marriage ("NOM") to support NOM's anti-gay jihad. Here are highlights from Alvin's post:

A 2005 article on now disgraced Atlanta pastor Eddie Long highlights a disturbing perspective to this issue of the National Organization for Marriage utilizing the black church and leaders against marriage equality that very few people are openly talking about.

The article theorizes that there was a tie between Long’s 2005 anti-marriage equality march held in Atlanta and a $1 million grant he received from the faith-based initiatives of the Bush Administration. The article also theorizes that other black pastors were rewarded for making public positions against marriage equality.

When I read the recent disgusting comments of Pastor Patrick Wooden and several other black ministers and leaders assembled by the NOM to combat marriage equality, I can’t help wondering if we are seeing a retread of this theory.

While I’m certainly not making pointed accusations, I have been amazed at how quickly and convenient these coalitions between NOM and several black pastors and leaders have come together. I have also been alarmed by the rhetoric. There seems to be a degree of unrestrained glee and vindictive pleasure in not only attacking marriage equality, dehumanizing the gay community, but also – particularly in Wooden’s case – going on a tangent about alleged gay sex acts.

These folks come across like well-paid hired guns. . . . . And in this case, we may be talking about NOM’s mysterious funds. Remember, the organization has fought tooth and nail to conceal not only how much it has, but also just who is footing the bill. Yet NOM spends that money like water, brazenly committing large sums of money to stop marriage equality in states like New Hampshire and Washington.

I am not the only lgbtq of color to have voiced this opinion. In the lgbtq of color community, there has been much talk and opinion-forming that these ministers and leaders who step out publicly to not only vilify marriage equality but verbally crucify the gay community in general aren’t exactly doing it solely on spiritual terms.

Again, I am merely speculating. However, if, when it’s all said and done, we find out that money has in fact been greasing some brown, very well manicured palms, lgbtqs of color won’t be surprised and we won’t be shocked. But we will say “we told you so.”

Candidly, in my personal opinion, there are few organizations more morally bankrupt and willing to engage in underhanded and dishonest behavior than the "godly Christian" set. It seems, in their minds, the means justify the end - i.e., the persecution and denigration of LGBT individuals - and no lie and no bribe is too big or distasteful for the Christianists. Indeed, they are the most immoral people one is likely to ever meet.

More Batshitery from Justice Clarence Thomas

I've written frequently about the need in my opinion for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to either resign from or be removed from the U.S. Supreme Court given his many ethical lapses and his wife, Jinny Thomas' blatant partisanship and extremism all of which is injecting tens - if not hundreds - of thousands of dollars into the Thomas household's fiances. How is one impartial when The irony, of course, is that Thomas whines about judicial activism even as he engages in it himself to a shocking degree. Apparently, it only counts as judicial activism if the result is progressive while reactionary - dare I say Neanderthal? - activism doesn't exist in Thomas' f*cked up fantasy world. One of the roles of the Courts - including the Supreme Court - is to rein in both the executive and legislative branches when they over step the limits of the U. S. Constitution. This simple reality is apparently beyond the grasp of Thomas' (in my view) limited intellect. Here are some highlights from Think Progress:

At a speech to Nebraska law students, Justice Clarence Thomas made a surprising claim — that the Supreme Court has been too activist and should stop second-guessing elected leaders: [Thomas] told the group that the court is being asked to play too big of a role in the nation’s governance. Currently, he said too many of the difficult decisions are being left to the courts to decide. “The really hard calls ought to be made by citizens and their political leaders,” Thomas said.

Thomas is, of course, correct that the current Supreme Court has gone out of its way to undermine democracy. Thomas and his four conservative colleagues destroyed meaningful checks on corporate money in politics. They undermined essential workplace protections enacted by democratically elected officials, and they wholeheartedly endorse a privatized, corporate-owned arbitration system which allows powerful corporations to immunize themselves from countless laws.

Moreover, Justice Thomas is by far the worst offender on the Supreme Court. A 2005 Yale study found that Thomas is more likely to strike down an act of Congress than any other member of the Court. Indeed, if given his way, Thomas would return America to an era when fathers competed with their teenaged children for work and African-Americans could legally be excluded from jobs, hotels, and lunch counters

So Thomas’ claim that “the court is being asked to play too big of a role in the nation’s governance” is quite true — and all that Thomas needs to do to fix this problem is to quit the relentless campaign of judicial activism he began the minute he joined the Supreme Court.

Could all the money Thomas' wife has lapped up from conservative and possibly corporate sources have possibly influenced Thomas' ruling??

Eric Cantor Hit For Potentially Profiting From U.S. Default

I have previously looked at the issue of the weasel like Congressman Eric Cantor who is potentially seeking to reap a personal financial find fall through pushing the USA into a default on its debt obligation. As previously noted, Cantor has invested in a fund that will sky rocket in value should the debt limit impasse not be resolved. Democrats have belatedly found some back bone and a resolution is being circulated that puts a spot light on Cantor's duplicitous conflict of interest. Cantor's behavior truly needs to be made front page news. The man is disgusting and an embarrassment to Virginia. As noted before I suspect the man would sell his own mother for the right price in his quest for power - and based on Cantor's madness for power, I suspect that the price might not be all that high. Here are highlights from Huffington Post on the Democrat backed resolution the text of which can be found at the HuffPo page:
*
House Democrats are circulating a resolution accusing House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) of having a conflict of interest in the debt ceiling debate, a move that could provide an awkward C-SPAN moment for one of the lead Republicans in the budget negotiations. The resolution goes after Cantor's investment in ProShares Trust Ultrashort 20+ Year Treasury ETF, a fund that "takes a short position in long-dated government bonds."
*
The fund is essentially a bet against U.S. government bonds. If the debt ceiling is not raised and the United States defaults on its debts, the value of Cantor's fund would likely increase.
*
The Democratic resolution, obtained by The Huffington Post from a Democratic source on the Hill, argues that Cantor "stands to profit from U.S. treasury default, which thereby raises the appearance of a conflict of interest," and that he "may be sabotaging [debt ceiling] negotiations for his own personal gain."
*
The resolution is a question of privilege, which deals with the rights, dignity, safety and integrity of the proceedings of the House of Representatives. It has direct access to the floor, meaning that at any time, a lawmaker can rise and question the privileges of the House and offer a resolution. It must then be read in its entirety, as soon as it is presented. The resolution is unlikely to be ruled valid by the parliamentarian, but it could certainly create an uncomfortable bit of political theater when it's read.
*
"Given the language in this resolution, obviously that would be incendiary, if you chose the right moment," said a House Democratic aide who added that right now, it appeared the party was still shopping around for a member willing to put it on the floor.

Eric Cantor's Glaring Conflict of Interest

I make no bones about my view that Virginia Congressman Eric Cantor is a despicable weasel. Frankly, I think he'd sell his mother for the right price in order to gain political power - and the price would not be very high. Similarly, he apparently doesn't mind endangering the nation's economic well being in exchange for potential personal financial gain. Why do I say this? Because as Salon is reporting, Cantor is investing in a fund that skyrockets in value as U.S. Treasury bonds plummet in vale. And who is doing his utmost to cause a debt crisis that will make U.S. Treasury bonds plummet in value? Why, Eric Cantor, of course. Eric Cantor exemplifies what is wrong with today's GOP. He is, in my opinion, devoid of honor, integrity and honesty. Here are some highlights from Salon:
*
When Eric Cantor shut down debt ceiling negotiations last week, it did more than just rekindle fears that the U.S. government might soon default on its debt obligations -- it also brought him closer to reaping a small financial windfall from his investment in a mutual fund whose performance is directly affected by debt ceiling brinkmanship.
*
Last year the Wall Street Journal reported that Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House, had between $1,000 and $15,000 invested in ProShares Trust Ultrashort 20+ Year Treasury EFT. The fund aggressively "shorts" long-term U.S. Treasury bonds, meaning that it performs well when U.S. debt is undesirable. (A short is when the trader hopes to profit from the decline in the value of an asset.)
*
According to his latest financial disclosure statement, which covers the year 2010 and has been publicly available since this spring, Cantor still has up to $15,000 in the same fund. . . . . Unless an agreement can be reached, the U.S. could begin defaulting on its debt payments on Aug. 2. If that happens and Cantor is still invested in the fund, the value of his holdings would skyrocket.
*
[S]ince Cantor abruptly called off debt ceiling negotiations last Thursday, the fund is up 3.3 percent. Even if an agreement is ultimately reached before Aug. 2, the fund could continue to benefit between now and then from the uncertainty.
*
[S]omeone negotiating the debt ceiling should be invested in this kind of an ultra-short. We can only guess how much he understands what’s in his portfolio, but you’d think a politician would know better. It looks pretty bad."
*
One would think that someone in Cantor's position in Congress would want to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. But in today's GOP arrogance and a disregard to appropriate conduct seem to be the norm.

Clarence Thomas' Growing Ethics Scandal

I have written previously about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' numerous ethical lapses and his outright fraudulent financial disclosures that have failed to reveal the far right money gravy train enjoyed by Thomas' wife and, indirectly, Thomas himself. Likewise, expensive gifts to Thomas and his pet projects appear to be continuing unabated. Now, the New York Times is reporting several huge financial windfalls that Thomas has enjoyed compliments of Harlan Crow, a Dallas real estate magnate and a major contributor to conservative causes. I've been blunt on this blog in terms of speaking my view that Thomas needs to resign from the Supreme Court and, if he will not go voluntarily, he needs to be removed. He is a disgrace as a member of the Supreme Court plain and simple. Think Progress has a piece that documents why Thomas needs to go from the Court as have other justices that have engaged in similar unethical behavior. First, these highlights from the Times story:
*
Mr. Crow stepped in to finance the multimillion-dollar purchase and restoration of the cannery, featuring a museum about the culture and history of Pin Point that has become a pet project of Justice Thomas’s.
*
The project throws a spotlight on an unusual, and ethically sensitive, friendship that appears to be markedly different from those of other justices on the nation’s highest court. Mr. Crow has done many favors for the justice and his wife, Virginia, helping finance a Savannah library project dedicated to Justice Thomas, presenting him with a Bible that belonged to Frederick Douglass and reportedly providing $500,000 for Ms. Thomas to start a Tea Party-related group. They have also spent time together at gatherings of prominent Republicans and businesspeople at Mr. Crow’s Adirondacks estate and his camp in East Texas.
*
Supreme Court ethics have been under increasing scrutiny, largely because of the activities of Justice Thomas and Ms. Thomas, whose group, Liberty Central, opposed President Obama’s health care overhaul — an issue likely to wind up before the court. Mr. Crow’s donation to Liberty Central was reported by Politico.
*
Mr. Crow has not personally been a party to Supreme Court litigation, but his companies have been involved in federal court cases, including four that went to the appellate level. And he has served on the boards of two conservative organizations involved in filing supporting briefs in cases before the Supreme Court. One of them, the American Enterprise Institute, with Mr. Crow as a trustee, gave Justice Thomas a bust of Lincoln valued at $15,000 and praised his jurisprudence at an awards gala in 2001.
*
There are a number of reasons Justice Thomas might be thankful to Mr. Crow. In addition to giving him the Douglass Bible, valued 10 years ago at $19,000, Mr. Crow has hosted the justice aboard his private jet and his 161-foot yacht, at the exclusive Bohemian Grove retreat in California and at his grand Adirondacks summer estate called Topridge, a 105-acre spread that once belonged to Marjorie Merriweather Post, the cereal heiress.
*
The code of conduct is quite clear that judges are not supposed to be soliciting money for their pet projects or charities, period,” said Arn Pearson, a lawyer with Common Cause. “If any other federal judge was doing it, he could face disciplinary action.”
*
Since 2004, Justice Thomas has never reported another gift. He has continued to disclose travel costs paid by schools and organizations he has visited for speeches and teaching, but he has not reported that any travel was provided by Mr. Crow. Travel records for Mr. Crow’s planes and yacht, however, suggest that Justice Thomas may have used them in recent years.
*
Here are highlights from Think Progress as to why all of this is a serious problem:
*
If this sounds familiar, it’s because America has seen this movie before. Indeed, the Thomas scandal is little more than a remake of the forty year-old gifting scandal that brought down Justice Abe Fortas. Like Thomas, Fortas liked to associate with wealthy individuals with potential business before his Court. And like Thomas, Fortas took inappropriate gifts from his wealthy benefactors.
*
It is difficult to distinguish Fortas’ scandal from Thomas’. Like Fortas, Thomas accepted several very valuable gifts from parties who are frequently interested in the outcome of federal court cases. One of Thomas’ benefactors has even filed briefs in his Court since giving Thomas a $15,000 gift, and Thomas has not recused himself from each of these cases.
*
Of course, Thomas is also the least likely Justice to actually follow the command of precedent. Thomas embraces a discredited theory of the Constitution which would return America to a time when federal child labor laws were considered unconstitutional. His fellow justices criticize him for showing “utter disregard for our precedent and Congress’ intent.” Even ultra-conservative Justice Antonin Scalia finds Thomas’ approach to the law too extreme — in Scalia’s words “I am a textualist. I am an originalist. I am not a nut.”
*
But Thomas’ disregard for what has come before him changes nothing about the precedent he faces. If Abe Fortas had to resign his seat, so too should Clarence Thomas.

Virginia Thomas Increases Financial Ties to Right Wing Organizations

I have addressed the inappropriate activities of Virginia Thomas - wife of the (in my view) ethically challenger Justice Clarence Thomas - on several occasions. Now, Virginia Thomas has taken a job at The Daily Caller as a "reporter." It's yet another vehicle by which Thomas and her husband become more and more clamped to the teet of right wing organizations. A Google search suggests that Thomas makes in the neighbor hood of $213,00 a year. With his wife pulling at least that much - or likely more - from right wing organizations, is it even a credible argument that Justice Thomas can remain unbiased and objective on issues being championed those who by his wife's (and his) meal ticket? Frankly, Thomas has always been a lousy justice and now with his compromised objectivity it is time either (1) for him to resign from the Supreme Court, or (2) for Virginia Thomas to retire from far right politics and return to the hearth and home. They cannot have it both ways. Here are highlights from Talking Points Memo:
*
Ginni Thomas, the tea party leader, health care reform foe, and controversial wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, will join The Daily Caller as a reporter.
*
She's no stranger to the Caller either -- it's where she took refuge when her most recent scandal aired out in the press. In 2010, it was revealed that she'd telephoned Anita Hill -- the woman who accused her husband of sexual harassment during his Supreme Court confirmation hearing back in 1991 -- to ask for an apology. Shortly after that episode was publicized, she stepped down from her job as head of the organization Liberty Central, which boasts of assisting grassroots clients with governmental affairs, but isn't a registered lobbying firm.
*
After leaving Liberty Central, Thomas set up Liberty Consulting, which billed itself as an advocacy firm, but there were no records of Thomas having registered as a lobbyist. The website for Liberty Consulting was down as of Tuesday morning. She was also touting herself as an "ambassador" to the incoming Republican freshman class. To escape the media storm, Thomas took shelter at the Caller.

Law Professors Ask for Ethics Code for Supreme Court Justices

This blog has looked at the unethical and biased conduct of Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia a number of times. Given the conduct of Thomas in lying on financial disclosure statements and the activities of his wife, a case can surely be made that Thomas needs to be removed from the Court. Thomas clearly thinks himself above the law and has flipped the bird at traditional political disengagement by judges. Scalia's behavior, while less egregious, is no less troubling. These two men have made it perfectly clear that they are incapable of objectivity and unbiased consideration of a number of significant cases coming before the Court. Now, a number of law professors are calling on Congress to enact ethical rules that would clarify when Justices must step aside in cases. The Washington Post looks at this development. Here are some story highlights:
*
A group of more than a hundred law professors from across the country has asked Congress to extend an ethical code of conduct to the Supreme Court - for the first time - and clarify when individual justices should step away from specific legal cases.
*
The group's appeal on Wednesday, in a letter to the House and Senate Judiciary committees, comes after recent controversies involving travel and appearances at political events by several Supreme Court justices, including Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. Rep. Christopher S. Murphy (D-Conn.) said he plans to introduce legislation that addresses the issue.
*
Thomas and Scalia have been criticized by a public interest group for attending private political meetings sponsored in January 2007 and 2008 by David and Charles Koch, conservative billionaires who made large contributions during last year's election and have financially backed the tea party movement.
*
Precisely what happened at those meetings remains unclear, but neither of the justices' routine financial disclosures mentioned that the Kochs had organized the events.
*
Decisions to recuse, or step away from deliberations, by tradition have been left up to the individual justices at the center of any complaint, contrary to the practice on most state supreme courts. The professors said in their letter to the committees that their goal is not to second-guess the activities of any individual judge but to create "mandatory and enforceable rules to protect the integrity of the Supreme Court.
*
As seems to be increasingly the case it is the so-called conservatives who claim to honor the Constitution that are the biggest threat to its continued application across the board. Just like the Christianists who lie incessantly while claiming to revere the Bible, Thomas, Scalia and their conservative brethren make a mockery of much of the Constitution.

Justice Alito Violates Code of Conduct for United States Judges

Perhaps Justice Alito - who in my opinion should never have been approved for a position on the U. S. Supreme Court - has been emboldened by Clarence Thomas' flouting the long standing conduct of federal judges and partisan political involvement via Virginia Thomas' outrageous conduct and acceptance of large amounts of anonymous donations for her PAC that lobbies for ultra conservative policies (Ms. Thomas, of course, draws a salary from her PAC). Whatever the motivation, Alito believes that he's above the rules. Canon 5 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges provides in relevant part as follows:
*
A JUDGE SHOULD REFRAIN FROM POLITICAL ACTIVITY
A. General Prohibitions. A judge should not:
(1) act as a leader or hold any office in a political organization;
(2) make speeches for a political organization or candidate, or publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office; or
(3) solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to a political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a ticket for a dinner or other event sponsored by a political organization or candidate.
* * *
C. Other Political Activity. A judge should not engage in any other political activity.

*

Pretty clear an unambiguous language, right? Apparently not if one is Samuel Alito. Then you think it's fine and daddy to attend a far right political fundraiser that backs far right Republican candidates and policies. Unfortunately, Alito's behavior is typical of the far right (especially far right Christians) who feel that the rules apply to everyone except them. ThinkProgress has coverage on this shocking improper conduct by a sitting Supreme Court justice. Three justices were relieved from the bench in Iowa by religious extremists for respecting the law. Meanwhile, justices like Alito and Thomas who violate ethical codes remain on the court. A pretty f*cked up state of affairs. Here are some highlights:
*
Last night, the American Spectator . . . . held its annual gala fundraising event. The Spectator is more than merely an ideological outlet. Spectator publisher Al Regnery helps lead a secretive group of conservatives called the “Conservative Action Project,” formed after President Obama’s election, to help lobby for conservative legislative priorities, elect Republicans (the Conservative Action Project helped campaign against Democrat Bill Owens in NY-23), and block President Obama’s judicial appointments. The Spectator’s gala last night, with ticket prices/sponsorship levels ranging from $250 to $25,000, featured prominent Republicans . . . .
*
As Alito entered the event last night, I approached the Justice and asked him why he thought it appropriate to attend a highly political fundraiser with the chairman of the Republican Party, given Alito’s position on the court. Alito appeared baffled, and replied, “it’s not important that I’m here.” “But,” I said, “you also helped headline this same event two years ago, obviously helping to raise political money as the keynote.” Alito replied curtly, “it’s not important,” before walking away from me. . . .Before I could come close to him, his security guards threatened me with arrest.
*
Documents exposed by ThinkProgress last month revealed that Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas have also attended secret political fundraisers. We published a memo detailing fundraising events, organized by oil billionaires David and Charles Koch, to fund Republican campaigns.
*
That Code [of Conduct for United States Judges] provides that in almost all circumstances, “a judge should not personally participate in fund-raising activities, solicit funds for any organization, or use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for that purpose. A judge should not personally participate in membership solicitation if the solicitation might reasonably be perceived as coercive or is essentially a fund-raising mechanism.”

"Saturday Night Live's" Message From Hillary Clinton: "I Have No Ethical Standards"

Saturday Night Lives calls it correctly