The featured guests at the dinner? Scalia and Thomas.
It’s nothing new: The two justices have been attending Federalist Society events for years. And it’s nothing that runs afoul of ethics rules. In fact, justices are exempt from the Code of Conduct that governs the actions of lower federal judges.
If they were, they arguably fell under code’s Canon 4C, which states, “A judge may attend fund-raising events of law-related and other organizations although the judge may not be a speaker, a guest of honor, or featured on the program of such an event.“
Nevertheless, the sheer proximity of Scalia and Thomas to two of the law firms in the case, as well as to a company with a massive financial interest, was enough to alarm ethics-in-government activists.
“This stunning breach of ethics and indifference to the code belies claims by several justices that the court abides by the same rules that apply to all other federal judges,” said Bob Edgar, the president of Common Cause. “The justices were wining and dining at a black-tie fundraiser with attorneys who have pending cases before the court. Their appearance and assistance in fundraising for this event undercuts any claims of impartiality, and is unacceptable.”
The one Beast worse because the smarter of the two; the other failed to disclose wife's massive income levels from conservative cash cow position(s). Among hits returned by that linked Google search, this (as always, click to enlarge and read - see original for full report and working links):
Taking Liberties. Excessively so. Offensively so. If that screenshot was not enough for you -- There's more. There's this, from the same Bradblog report (where you go for the active links):
-----------------
Yes, and we know Brad Friedman is "a leftist." So what has mainstream media said?
 |
| this NYTimes link |
Less judgmental, in the wording. But the stink is the same. And in the photo, that's lighting in the background. Not a halo over the lady's head.
_____________UPDATE____________
If you've nothing to hide, why hide it? Mrs. Thomas and her minions have totally scrubbed the latest venture's website. It is blank, and there's no source code to review if you try the domain:
http://libertyinc.co/
The WayBack Machine has only one capture online, from after the scrubbing.
Whois and other info from DomainTools, here, here and here. The latter two, beyond a whois search, are paid-for and/or subscription services.
If any reader has purchased access to the items, and wants to send a screenshot, it would be most appreciated. What that site touted, before scrubbed, might be quite interesting to know. How it cast a light on Mr. Thomas, from what Mrs. Thomas was huckstering is something we all deserve to know.
______________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
A two page screenshot of the scrubbed homepage, only that, was found online here. All you need to consider is apparent from the first page. Click it. Read it and respect your nation and government for what it's become vs what it might have become:
The screenshot is linked to, from here. Add to that, Raw Story, here. It makes you proud - Such upward mobility exists in America. If pliantly useful, you get yours. And then there are kill-joys who want to do this to such an able jurist. Reported here. Some cannot feel that pride, e.g., here and here. It is almost as if they'd have expected a different kind of man, and mind, and sense of justice and perspective, to inherit the seat on the Court that was held by Thurgood Marshall. Why in our times would they ever have expected that? Thomas fits the times and we have John Danfort to be grateful to for the insight. Marshall was a giant. One's enough, for those championing the Thomas spouses.
And after all, Ginni Thomas' intent was to help clients reach "principled statesmen and candidates." Her website berfore the scrubbing said so. It's in the image above. How can naysayers find fault with helping to reach principled individuals, for those eager to pay the lady's fee? I'd even guess she could help with "principled statesmen" in the judiciary. Doing so, as your hired "ambassador." What puzzles me, is with such high motives, why exactly did she scrub the page?