MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Clinton Emails Show David Brock Floating Idea of Impeaching Clarence Thomas

Wanted to essentially refight the confirmation battle (from the other side this time)

David Brock, completely tone deaf political insider.APDavid Brock, the former conservative author-turned-liberal-media-activist, once defended Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in The Real Anita Hill. Now it appears Brock, who disavowed his book’s premise back in 2001, is trying to destroy Thomas.

Last night a new batch of emails kept on Hillary Clinton’s private server when she served as secretary of state was released. Among the thousands of emails was a missive written by Brock titled “Memo on Impeaching Clarence Thomas.” The e-mail lists situations where Brock argues evidence was suppressed and a witness was intimidated (by Brock himself) in connection with the nomination hearings for Thomas. From Politico:

The memo also detailed differences between [Lillian] McEwen's 2010 accounts and Thomas' testimony in terms of workplace behavior, including incidents in which Thomas remarked on the size of a woman's breasts or her bra size, as well as making the case for suppression of evidence and intimidating witnesses.

"A fourth woman with knowledge of Thomas's behavior, Kaye Savage, was first named in a 1994 book Strange Justice by Jill Abramson and Jane Mayer. Savage was a close colleague of Thomas's and Hill's in the Reagan Administration. Savage was interviewed by Judiciary Committee staff after she contacted the committee, and a staffer made notes, but she was never called to testify. Her story did not become public until Abramson and Mayer obtained the staff notes and interviewed Savage, who told the authors of visiting Thomas's apartment during the time Hill was working for Thomas and observing stacks of pornographic magazines and all of the walls of the apartment papered with centerfolds of large-breasted nude women," Brock wrote.

One source of the memo to Clinton was advisor Sid Blumenthal. Blumenthal, though, appeared to be sending Clinton all sorts of emails, unsolicited, about everything, including excerpts from books by his son, Max. The latest crop of emails, though, also shows two copies of the memo in the system sent directly by Brock with no indication of a recipient.

Clinton does not appear to have responded to any of these memos, not even to ask an aide to print them out, so we have no idea whether this a suggestion anybody within Barack Obama’s administration (because this obviously had to have been sent around to more than just Clinton’s camp) treated seriously. The emails were sent in October of 2010 right before voters handed control of the House of Representatives (who would be the ones to decide whether to impeach a justice) to the Republicans. It clearly was not going to happen and it’s hard to conceive of a situation where it would, given that no justice has ever been successfully impeached (Thomas Jefferson attempted to drive out Samuel Chase in 1805 but failed).

Photo Credit: AP

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Zeb||

    That guy looks like a young person trying to disguise himself as an old person.

  • Drake||

    I've always thought he looks like somebody tried to make a Goblin or Orc who would pass for human - and almost succeeded.

  • Zeb||

    Heh. I can see that, I guess.

  • Hugh Akston||

    That hair is incredible. He looks like a sketch show parody of a political apparatchik.

  • EMD||

    ALIENS!

  • ||

    Are we sure he's not wearing a Newt Gingrich mask?

  • JWatts||

    It's not Jowly enough.

  • ||

    I thought he was going for a Feeder of Vaal look.

  • Drake||

    More importantly - At least 150 of the latest batch were classified.

    And we get at least another 6k on Monday.

  • Ted S.||

    Gotta love dumping the emails on Labor Day.

  • Sevo||

    They'll prolly speed it up: 7PM Friday.

  • JWatts||

    No, they won't work that late. It will be at 5:15pm. Everybody else in government will already have shut their computers down by that point. Fortunately the advent of cell phones with continuous news feeds is making that a less useful tactic.

  • Drake||

    It must be a coincidence.

  • Irish ♥s ESB||

    Oh my God, someone telling Hillary Clinton they should impeach a man for inappropriate workplace behavior based on nothing but innuendo and unproven accusations has to be one of the greatest ironies in history.

    Based on the exact same sort of 'evidence' Hillary Clinton's husband is a no-shit rapist. If this would be enough to impeach Thomas, it would be enough to jail Bill for the rest of his life.

    Her story did not become public until Abramson and Mayer obtained the staff notes and interviewed Savage, who told the authors of visiting Thomas's apartment during the time Hill was working for Thomas and observing stacks of pornographic magazines and all of the walls of the apartment papered with centerfolds of large-breasted nude women

    Even if this story was true, it's illegal how? I was unaware that an obsession with porn in your own apartment was a criminal activity now.

  • WTF||

    And it's also credible that Thomas plastered his walls with centerfolds like a freshman college student living in a frat house.

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    Thomas is Jeff Spicoli?

    "Get out of here, Curtis. I don't hear you unless you knock."

  • Slammer||

    "Dad!!! Jeff threw a bong at me!"

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    Sad that there is absolutely no way that movie gets made today.

  • Curtisls701||

    I watched Animal House the other day, and thought the same thing.

  • Lee G||

    Came here to say this.

  • JWatts||

    "Based on the exact same sort of 'evidence' Hillary Clinton's..."

    The entire history of the Clinton's has always been one about the rules not applying to them.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I imagine every batch of messages released will include an irrelevant but scandalous (for others) email exchange that is too juicy not to focus on.

  • WTF||

    They used their delay productively by planting distractions. Note that this is the focus from the latest batch rather than the fact that at least 150 of the emails were classified.

  • ||

    But they were classified after the fact!

    /prog

  • JWatts||

    Claims the State Department.

  • blcartwright||

    Standard Form 312, which must be signed by government employees handling classified material, says in the first paragraph

    "Classified material is marked or unmarked classified material..."

  • Slammer||

    This is interesting, as well:

    Email from Hillary to staff over then-classified document:

    "It's a public statement! Just e-mail it"

  • Rich||

    "until ops converts it to the unclassified email system"

    W. T. F.?

  • Lee G||

    It's that simple process by which things become unclassified. Unless of course it's something the government would rather you not see, then it becomes absolutely impossible for the next 70 years.

  • Rich||

    It's that simple process by which things become unclassified.

    "By the power invested in me by The State, I deem thee 'unclassified'!"

  • Jay Dubya||

    Im pretty sure that legally, documents are unclassified by the power of Greyskull

  • JWatts||

    To be fair, I agree with Hillary Clinton about that. If covert ops was trying to "classify" a public statement, that's ridiculous. Of course if it wasn't really a public statement then it's clearly an example of her sending a classified statement through the email. And if the email in question went to her email address, it's pretty damn hard to argue that it wasn't previously classified.

  • Rich||

    +1 Aviation Leak

  • Timon 19||

    I don't think that's what's being said. I think she's trying to use the argument that gets TONS of people in trouble with classified data: because someone knows something about it outside classified channels and/or it appears in print or in an utterance that it is now OK to pass around like a joint. They spend a ton of time on that very point in briefings for a reason - it's still a major no-no. The fact that it's "a public statement", whatever that means, does not in any way declassify the information.

  • Curtisls701||

    The unstated implication for me is that this is just another example of Clinton knowing the machinations of classified information, and thus that she knew she was circumventing these requirements.

  • Number 2||

    I am sure that Secretary Clinton responded by telling Brock that Justice Thomas' sexual conduct was a "private matter" for himself, his wife, and his God, that we should be interested only in how he performs his public role, and that it is time to MoveOn.

  • Swiss Servator||

    +1.org

  • blcartwright||

    well, you know, reading porn and being obsessed with big tits is proof that Thomas sexually harassed his subordinate

  • Illocust||

    And I bet that there is now going to be a public push to impeach him. No way the campus rape activist don't fall behind kicking someone off the supreme court because of a rumor.

  • Loki||

    Well, they can kick people out of college and ruin the rest of their lives over a rumor, so why not? /sarc

  • ||

    Thomas=Cosby but Clinton=/=Duggar?

  • In League with the Dark Ones||

    Clinton's the Right Sort of People.

  • Irish ♥s ESB||

    OT: Canadian Human Rights Council wants to make it illegal to criticize Islam.

    The bill takes its inspiration from recommendations made public by the QHRC in November 2014. Jacques Frémont, the commission’s president, explained that he planned to use the requested powers to sue those critical of certain ideas, “people who would write against … the Islamic religion … on a website or on a Facebook page.”


    Frémont is an unabashed legal activist, who sees the QHRC’s mandate as “provoking a social change” and “making the law.” (“You will make the law with difficult cases, risky cases,” he said at a March conference at the Université de Montréal.) In support of such stringent censorship he cites resolutions adopted by UN bodies. But the only UN body pressing for this measure is the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an Islamist consortium that equates criticism of Islam with hate speech. The OIC’s member nations have nothing to teach any democratic society in the way of “inclusion,” “openness” and “living together,” all justifications for Bill 59 made by Premier Couillard.
  • RBS||

    I guess Rufus's subpoena is in the mail.

  • Just say Nikki||

    NB it's the Quebec Human Rights Commission (the QHRC as opposed to the CHRC, which also exists).

    Amusingly, this is the other bill the same guy introduced:

    The first, Bill 62, would shore up “religious neutrality” in Quebec. Its principal provision, the proscription of face coverings in the public sector, is largely pointless but relatively mild, as curtailments on religious freedom go, compared to the broader ban on religious garb the Parti Québécois had contemplated.

    Now that sounds more like Quebec to me.

    Of course, not respecting freedom of speech also sounds like Quebec. Cf language laws.

  • ||

    I forget, how much freer is Canukistan than the US?

  • Irish ♥s ESB||

    You ain't seen nothin' yet!

    Ironically, Lebuis says, supporters justify the bill by suggesting it will protect democracy against terrorism. They reason that "terrorism is a reaction towards people who criticize their religion," he explains, "so by banning the criticism of Islam, we would end terrorism." Such arguments have been made both by Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard and by Muslim groups such as the Association of Muslims and Arabs for a Secular Quebec (AMAL). "Hate and Islamophobia drive certain people in groups subject to discrimination toward another form of extremism and violence," said AMAL President Haroun Bouazzi in a recent presentation to the National Assembly during a debate over the bill.

    Does secular mean something different in Quebec because I was unaware that making it illegal to criticize a religion was a secular idea.

  • Sevo||

    "...They reason that "terrorism is a reaction towards people who criticize their religion," he explains, "so by banning the criticism of Islam, we would end terrorism."..."

    OTOH, the entire population could convert to the terrorists' religion, and by this reasoning, get the same result with the same careful regard for freedom.

  • LynchPin1477||

    Well, they would have to convert to the terrorists preferred version of the religion. And it seems like there are almost as many of those as there are terrorist groups.

  • commodious spittoon||

    EL OH EL

    Oh, yes, genocidal terrorists with a political bent and foreign backers opposed to Western intervention will surely leave the West alone so long as we don't make eye contact.

  • Irish ♥s ESB||

    It also explains why countries like Afghanistan that are 99% Muslim are so peaceful and secular. I mean, there are virtually no non-Muslims, so the people have no reason to go around killing infidels who are mean to them, which has resulted in heretofore unseen peace and prosperity.

  • commodious spittoon||

    COLONIAL HERITAGE

  • kbolino||

    Some people just can't let their grudge against Alexander the Great go...

  • Slammer||

    "Damn darkies have no moral agency of their own, only reactions. No better than animals."

  • MJGreen - Docile Citizen||

    Cytotoxic hardest hit.

  • Rhywun||

    the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an Islamist consortium that equates criticism of Islam with hate speech

    Hm, I wonder which class is protected under Islamic countries' "hate speech laws".

  • Ken Shultz||

    Can someone explain to me again why being physically attracted to females and talking about it necessarily makes a man unfit to be a Supreme Court Justice?

  • WTF||

    Because FEELZ.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Thomas remarked on the size of a woman's breasts or her bra size."

    So he's physically attracted to females--and we know he's physically attracted to females because he admitted it himself--and he's still on the bench?!

    My God! How can he be trusted to make rulings on the constitutionality of our laws--when he's openly attracted to females?!

    WHY ISN'T ANYBODY DOING SOMETHING ABOUT THIS?

  • WTF||

    We can't have a SCOTUS justice who employs teh MALE GAZE!!11!!!!!!

  • commodious spittoon||

    "I'd rather be a quack pervert than a ducky." Clarence Thomas, probably.

  • Rich||

    "Thomas remarked on the size of a woman's breasts or her bra size."

    Unlike women, who remarked on the size of a woman's breasts *and* her bra size.

  • commodious spittoon||

    The SCOTUS oath of office is very similar to the Jedi Code.

  • ||

    Killing people is fine as long as you feel it very deeply the right thing to do?

  • John||

    It doesn't necessarily make you unfit. It only makes you unfit if you don't support abortion on demand. You see having a man who supports abortion on demand proposition you or even grope you is an honor. Having a man who doesn't so much as look at you, is pretty much the same thing as rape.

  • WTF||

    I wish you were only making that up.

  • Zeb||

    Someone should tell all those college rape obsessives that. I'm sure most of the guys involved are pro-choice on abortion.

  • Trump-o-Matic 5000||

    That's what the Supreme Court does, right? I mean, if I understand the media correctly, they get together once a year to vote on whether or not to overturn Roe v. Wade? Also, something about KKKerperashuns being speech?

  • JWatts||

    "Can someone explain to me again why being physically attracted to females and talking about it necessarily makes a man unfit to be a Supreme Court Justice?"

    Well Ken, it's not just that fact, It's a combination of facts. First there's the above and then there's the fact that he's a Right Wing Ideologue who wants to subjugate all women. When you combine the two, it's clear that he's not fit to be a Supreme Court Justice. /derp

  • LynchPin1477||

    If he was out for drinks with some friends and made a comment about some woman's boobs, then that makes him like every other man on the planet.

    If he was making comments towards a coworker, that is highly unprofessional and possibly harassment.

  • Loki||

    Savage ... told the authors of visiting Thomas's apartment during the time Hill was working for Thomas and observing stacks of pornographic magazines and all of the walls of the apartment papered with centerfolds of large-breasted nude women,"

    I'm gonna call bullshit. I have a hard time believing that someone in Clarence Thomas' position and with his ambitions of becoming a SOTUS Justice would be stupid enough to invite anyone, especially a female, over to his apartment if it was decorated like a stereotypical college dude-bro's dorm room. No one is that stupid... but then again I also thought no one who was Sec. of State and had ambitions of being president would be stupid enough to try and use a private email server to conduct State Dept. business either.

  • Drake||

    Never believed it either, Even a porn aficionado is somewhat discrete if he ever wants to get laid.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Exactly. We keep everything in a locked trunk, which is disguised by a quilt knit by an old relative.

  • Antilles||

    Thank goodness for digital media. So much easier to hide porn these days...

  • Rich||

    Like this?

  • Galactic Chipper Cdr Lytton||

    But but Thomas is Long Dumb Silver so it's got to be true.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    "We obviously want to locate this package as quickly as possible because it does contain radioactive material, but we hasten to add it doesn't present a health threat to the community provided the contents, which are secured in a box with two layers of inner containment, are not disturbed," the statement said.

    Nobody would dare open a box with two layers of inner containment

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ra.....s-missing/

  • commodious spittoon||

    The ancient script adorning the box as well as the unsettling eldritch runes and vaguely skin-like leather jacket should have been enough.

  • UnCivilServant||

    "How did you get rid of the cursed book?"

    "We mailed it to ourselves, the postal service promptly lost it."

  • JWatts||

    You know, I realize that for plot reasons movies can never have a straightforward solution. However, just once, I'd like to see a hero, when in possession of some hideous artifact take the logical approach.

    What you mean I can't destroy this? And your saying it will be the end of human life if it's ever used? Umm yeah ok, we are not putting it behind the wall of the church which will inevitably be demolished in 50 years to make way for a freeway.

    We are going to divide it into two parts. Set them each in a plug of concrete. And sail a boat well out past the continental shelf of the Atlantic and drop one over board. And we'll frackin watch the sonar and make sure it drops straight down two miles to the bottom. Then we'll repeat the same operation in the Pacific.

  • UnCivilServant||

    You realize that it's usually the bad guys who have the resources to pull off stuff like that and the good guys have to improvise to make the plot more interesting, don't you?

  • EMD||

    MacGyver, see also.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Besides, by doing that, you're just giving it to the deep ones.

  • Citizen X||

    Well then, let them fight it out with DEEP SEVEN for it.

  • Trump-o-Matic 5000||

    The Atlanteans are ruled by the young Prince Namor, quick to anger and ruthless in his quest for vengeance against the surface-dwellers.

  • AlexInCT||

    How do you make a sequel after that move without having to make it all ludicrous?

  • Illocust||

    There could be a movie dedicated to getting to the bottom of the ocean and finding out it has been a dumping ground for all the ancient artifacts of doom since humanity has learned to sail.

  • SIV||

  • Lee G||

    Needs more exploding Nazis

  • R C Dean||

    two copies of the memo in the system sent directly by Brock with no indication of a recipient.

    How is that possible unless someone edited/redacted the email? Unless this was a draft email that was never sent? But that would mean Brock had an account on Hillary's server.

    W. T. F?

  • Galactic Chipper Cdr Lytton||

    How is that possible unless someone edited/redacted the email server?

    Just to make it a little more clear.

  • In League with the Dark Ones||

    It had to have been sent with all recipients in the BCC field which some email systems let you do. Then when BCC emails are sent, the BCC field is cleared. On the recipient's side, it'll says "undisclosed-recipients".

    On systems that don't allow BCC only recipients, most people just put their own email address or a dummy email address in the TO field and all the intended recipients in the BCC field.

    No need for editing or redacting the server.

  • R C Dean||

    The server receiving the email still has to know who to send it to, and keeps that info, even if its not readily visible to recipients. I know this because I have had my IT wallas unpack an incoming BCC for me.

  • BearOdinson||

    So aside from the Politico piece being very poorly written, basically the shorter version of memo is:
    "Thomas likes to beat off at home, and I (Brock) committed obstruction of justice. So impeach him."

  • John||

    Good news and bad news. The good news is that there is finally a country that is basing its currency on gold instead of by fiat. The bad news, well.....

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/.....k-currency

  • Illocust||

    Yep, heard about that. Fuckers are psychos, but they seem to be smart psychos.

  • John||

    Crazed, psychotic killers apparently have a better grasp on the realities of economics and currencies than the Federal Reserve. Boy, that gives you a warm fuzzy feeling, doesn't it?

  • Illocust||

    It seems like they just have no choice but to face reality on this matter. No one would accept a fiat currency from them, so they have to provide a currency that has inherent value separate from their acceptance and authority.

  • John||

    A better grasp of reality is still a better grasp of reality no matter what the reason you came to obtain it.

  • sarcasmic||

    You kidding? The Federal Reserve has been robbing Americans for a hundred years with its fiat money. They know what they're doing.

  • John||

    No. They honestly believe they are acting for the common good. They really are that delusional.

  • Loki||

    It all comes down to INTENTIONZ AND FEELZ.

  • John||

    They are top men and they mean well. That is enough.

  • sarcasmic||

    More like arrogance and hubris.

  • Loki||

    Intentionz and feez/ arrogance and hubris. WDATPDIM?

  • Loki||

    Intentionz and feez/ arrogance and hubris. WDATPDIM?

  • Drake||

    They have just chosen different delusions.

  • sarcasmic||

    Cue up the G n' R. Oh, wait. That's illusions. Never mind.

  • sarcasmic||

    Those will be collectible. Some day.

  • ||

    +1 Confederate dollar

  • sarcasmic||

    These are gold coins, not paper money. Derp much?

  • JWatts||

    Actually there were Confederate $5 gold pieces. And yes they kept their underlying value.

    https://goo.gl/iyMDli

  • R C Dean||

    Gold is never devalued by a design stamped on it.

  • kbolino||

    Derp much?

    wtf?

  • ||

    The group said its 21-carat 1-dinar coin weighs 4.25 grams, while the 21-carat five-dinar coin weighs double that.

    ... and all transactions are conducted in 5-dinar coins, while people hoard the 1-dinar coins.

    Gresham FTW!

  • JWatts||

    That's total weight. I'm guessing the gold content of the 5 dinar is 5 times that of the 1 dinar coin.

    Or yeah, Gresham's law FTW.

  • ||

    I'm guessing the gold content of the 5 dinar is 5 times that of the 1 dinar coin.

    21-carat is 0.875 fineness (21/24). So in the case of the 1-dinar coin, 87.5% of the 4.25 g total weight is gold, i.e. 3.71875 g. If the 5-dinar piece is the same fineness and double the weight, then its gold content is double (7.4375 g).

    Actually, even if the 5-dinar piece was pure (24-carat) gold and its weight 8.5 g, it would still only contain 2.29 times the gold of the 1-dinar piece.

    Something got to give ...

  • blcartwright||

    with gold currently going for $36 and change per gram, the 1 dinar coin would contain $136 worth of gold, the 5 dinar coin $272. That's awfully large for the smallest denomination. What if you want to buy a loaf of bread?

  • UnCivilServant||

    How could both be 21 carat gold if one were debased 2.5x as much as the other?

  • Loki||

    I'm curious if maybe their interpretation of Islam is just that fiat currency is incompatible with Sharia compliant banking? IOW, maybe they're still being idiotic fuck waffles.

  • Agammamon||

    I don't think their interpretation of Islam frowns on fiat currency - they just realize that they still don't have the power to force people to use their paper, let alone the tech to deal with forgery.

    Gold is a much easier currency to push as it will still be tradable *as gold* across borders, even if the face value of the coin is not accepted.

  • Agammamon||

    “Nobody outside their control will accept the currency . . .

    The hell they won't. These things will be freaking *collector's items*. Hell, I want a couple - so that in 10 years, when ISIS has been blown the fuck up and then our meddling allows an even worse group to seize power, I have a memento of the good old days when terrorists only raped and beheaded people and didn't have nukes.

  • R C Dean||

    Nobody outside their control will accept the currency . . .

    Any currency with precious metal content can and will be accepted for the value of that content.

    Probably not the face value, but American gold coins all have a face value which is utterly irrelevant to their real value.

  • John||

    How about someone look into Media Matters status as a nonprofit? Doesn't the head of the organization writing political strategy memos to Hillary Clinton kind of put that whole claim of being "non partisan" in a bit of doubt?

  • Illocust||

    Depends if he used MM resources to do it. He's not a non-profit non-partisan the org he works for is.

  • John||

    That would be one of the questions and we wouldn't know until we looked. Judging from these emails Brock is a paid Clinton adviser. When you consider that he founded and controls MM, that makes the whole thing a bit suspicious.

  • Loki||

    Did anyone ever buy their "non-partisan" bullshit anyway?

  • JWatts||

    The IRS did.

  • AlexInCT||

    That's because they serve the right political party/masters.

  • John||

    What was Brock thinking with this? Even in 2009, the Democrats could never have been able to get a conviction in the Senate. What would be the point of this other than to just humiliate Thomas? Is Brock delusional enough to think they could have one or just a vicious piece of shit who just wanted to humiliate and degrade Thomas?

  • Galactic Chipper Cdr Lytton||

  • Aloysious||

    What would be the point of this other than to just humiliate Thomas?

    That might have been the whole point. Slimeing works.

  • Sevo||

    "Slimeing works."

    Sometimes; look at B. and H. Clinton....

  • Drake||

    He's a vicious animal - they attack, that's what they do.

    By wondering about his motivations, you are projecting and engaging in Anthropomorphism.

  • AlmightyJB||

    They're not going after the only black scotus until at least after the election. Not the way things have been going.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Black SCOTUS matters

  • John||

    They won't go after him anyway. The Democrats are not going to control the House again for a very long time if ever. And no way is any Republican controlled house going after Thomas.

    This whole thing is just the ravings of a deranged and vicious animal.

  • Raven Nation||

    I'm not a conspiracy guy (and, yes, that is a bad way to start a sentence) but you have to start wondering if Brock's whole "conservative" phases was a plant just to give him credibility to then attack conservatives.

  • John||

    Maybe. It is hard to tell. the guy is a complete nut.

  • JWatts||

    Yeah, a nut job. He isn't cool enough to have ever been a plant. He's a "true believer" and the actual belief doesn't particularly matter.

  • Raven Nation||

    Yeah, that's a good point - was just thinking that. He was in hysteria as a conservative and is the same as a lib.

  • Loki||

    They'll just make sure everyone remembers that he's an Uncle Tom and not a "real" black man, and that by getting rid of him they'll then be able to appoint a "real" black SCOTUS Justice.

    Like, say, someone who graduated from Harvard Law, edited the Harvard Law Review, and was a constitutional law professor...

  • Agammamon||

    Hillary should offer that to Obama. "Give me your nod and I'll nominate you for an SC seat as soon as one of those fuckers drops dead."

  • AlexInCT||

    And the Clintons know how to make people drop dead... Ask Vince Foster.

  • Rich||

    Blumenthal, though, appeared to be sending Clinton all sorts of emails, unsolicited, about everything, including excerpts from books by his son, Max.

    Well, sheesh -- he was her *advisor*!

  • ||

    all of the walls of the apartment papered with centerfolds of large-breasted nude women

    An orgy of evidence, no?

    Seriously, not just naked pictures or pornographic images; *centerfolds* of *large-breasted* nude women. This doesn't sound like college dorm but, borderline psychotic (*all* of the walls?).

    IMO, she's one generation and/or professional line shy of explaining how she went to a Skulls party that Thomas attended, was slipped a roofie, dropped through a glass coffee table and raped in the dark by an unknown number of assailants, one of whom was Thomas.

  • UnCivilServant||

    I get the impression that there might have been one or two pin-ups and the 'witness' exaggerated, with each person in the chain furthering the hyperbole.

  • ||

    It occurred to me that I didnt' consider 'centerfold' correctly either. I was thinking 'centerfold' as in having the crease down the middle of the page and a thumbtack holding it to the wall. It would be awesome if he had some of Leo Jansen's or Alberto Vargas' work hanging on the wall.

  • OldMexican||

    I think you and I can imagine how the interview by the Judiciary Committee staff went:

    "Stacks of pornographic magazines, you say? So did you take a peek at them, or how do you know they were pornographic magazines? Ah, I see. And how many stacks do you say were there? Many? Ah, not many. And how tall were these stacks? Very or not very tall?"

    I'm thinking the Judiciary Committee did not want to drag that nutcase to testify in front of the Senate only to end up making fools of themselves.

  • ||

    Yeah, the first thought that came to my mind was; "And did you recognize any of these large-breasted women?"

    And that's why I don't do Judiciary Committee interviews for a living.

  • UnCivilServant||

    "Well, Miss September once filed an Amicus Brief with the court..."

    /end impersonation.

  • ||

    Could you pick them out of a lineup? *Would* you pick them out of a lineup?

  • R C Dean||

    This is exactly the kind of cross examination that Cruz is excellent at.

  • OldMexican||

    A fourth woman with knowledge of Thomas's behavior, Kaye Savage, was first named in a 1994 book Strange Justice by Jill Abramson and Jane Mayer. [...]Abramson and Mayer [...] interviewed Savage, who told the authors of visiting Thomas's apartment [...] and observing stacks of pornographic magazines and all of the walls of the apartment papered with centerfolds of large-breasted nude women," Brock wrote


    And, of course, Brock did not smell the bullshit like the Judiciary Committee staff did when they interviewed that nut.

    Clinton does not appear to have responded to any of these memos


    And she probably didn't. Makes more sense to ignore the hysterical suggestions of David Brock than to pay attention to them, because that would only serve as encouragement to the petulant fool.

  • ||

    Makes more sense to ignore the hysterical suggestions of David Brock than to pay attention to them, because that would only serve as encouragement to the petulant fool.

    And yet another conceivably quasi-plausible explanation for an extra personal email server that makes more sense than "email's hard!"

  • JWatts||

    "Clinton does not appear to have responded to any of these memos"

    Or those responses were among the 10's of thousands of "personal" emails deleted.

  • R C Dean||

    Clinton does not appear to have responded to any of these memos

    Either she didn't, or her response was so awful they are still trying to hide it. At this point, who can say?

  • Bretzky||

    There are three kinds of weasels: weasels, contemptible weasels, and David Brock.

  • Lee G||

    Frankly, this is the most depressing election in decades. It's one big parade of dirty assholes.

  • Zeb||

    It really is. I really need to stop caring because it is not helping my disposition.

    At least all my liberal friends seem to hate Hillary. Unfortunately they seem to like Sanders, which is really depressing.

  • *GILMORE*||

    Trump = I AM A HUMAN BIDET. SCRATCH THAT - FANCY EURO-ASS TICKLER - ... I AM A HUMAN BABY-WIPE, AND I WILL CLEAN THE ASS OF AMERICA AND MAKE US FRESH AGAIN

    FIRST THING I'LL DO IS CHANGE ALL THE MOUNTAINS BACK TO THEIR PROPER WHITE PEOPLE NAMES

  • Rhywun||

    Trump's epic trolling of America is somewhat amusing, no?

  • R C Dean||

    Its hilarious.

    And serving a valuable purpose, in its way. Ridiculing the ridiculous is always a public service. And the breathless coverage of Obama heading off to Alaska to Fight Climate Change and (illegally) rename a mountain is ridiculous, and deserves ridicule.

  • *GILMORE*||

    "Clinton does not appear to have responded to any of these memos, not even to ask an aide to print them out"

    Notable that this could be said about the vast majority of the email pile. (tho most of them have a 1-line response which is usually "print them out" or "let's talk soon")

    I went through about 100 of the things and not one had more than a sentence from Hillary

    as i said before = either she was sleeping her way through the job, or they deleted everything she ever actually had an opinion on.

  • Drake||

    The main purpose of her email account seems to an electronic method for her toadies to shamelessly kiss her royal bottom.

  • R C Dean||

    Incredibly, these are the emails that are the least damaging to her, and they put her and her little coterie of sycophants in a really bad light.

    As always, you have to wonder: if these are the most harmless emails, what do the others look like?

  • Trump-o-Matic 5000||

    These are the distracter emails. From what I can tell, there are three types we'll see:

    1) The humanizing emails - these are for Politico, Slate, etc.; the point is to paint the story to the True Believers that Hillary is just being persecuted by the nasty right wing conspiracy and all they want to do is embarrass her by airing her private correspondence

    2) The distracter emails - for NYT and other "news" organizations that don't particularly like her but are still firmly on Team Blue; they make her look bad, but nothing criminal

    3) The bad emails - most but not all of these have been deleted, we are still getting word that there's classified info, etc., in some; the media will largely not report on these, except organizations that are already known to have a Team Red bias, thus discrediting any claims that she should be in jail

    4) Anything worse than that has gone down the memory hole

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    The phrase is always and forever (since 1998, anyway) "vast right-wing conspiracy."

    It's impressive how long the mainline media has managed to carry water for Clinton from the time she ran for the NY Senate to today. Whitey Herzog taught me that you can't make chicken salad with chicken shit, but apparently that doesn't apply to celebrities and politics, where lipstick on a pig can last for at least 15 years.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    "Clinton does not appear to have responded to any of these memos, not even to ask an aide to print them out"

    Why must Scott S. mock elderly Americans whose early-onset dementia requires them to call their grandchildren over to print out their mapquest routes?

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    Now that I think about it, Hillary is much too old for this to be early onset.

  • Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper||

    Hilary: even worse than ISIL.

  • RockLibertyWarrior||

    David Brock is bottom feeding, piece of traitor scum shit and he should be treated as such. He is the court butt boy of the Clinton circle jerk who thought it would be more profitable to his shit heel career to switch sides and smear a man he once defended. Yeah fuck him, fuck him with a rusty, double edged hand saw.

  • jack brown||

    Least competent justice on the Court in many decades. He should be impeached for jurisprudential impotence.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online