ProPublica plans to publish another negative article about Clarence Thomas, using old and resolved allegations

In its relentless⁢ campaign to tarnish⁢ the reputation of Justice Clarence Thomas, ​the left-wing billionaire-funded website ProPublica is gearing up to release yet another deceitful article to justify its previous dishonest attacks on Thomas’ vacations with his friends. However, this latest ‌hit piece fails to change the fact that Thomas acted within the bounds of the‍ law ⁣and in accordance with⁢ the 2012 ruling of the governing legal body⁢ that he acted appropriately.

In its initial assault, ProPublica falsely accused Thomas of breaking the law by not reporting ⁢various vacations he took with his ⁤longtime friend Harlan Crow. To support ‍this claim, ‌ProPublica cited left-wing “judicial‍ ethics” experts‍ who are funded by the same left-wing billionaires supporting the website.

What ⁣ProPublica conveniently left out of its story is ⁢that the Judicial Conference of the United States,‍ composed of ‌federal ⁢judges and responsible for implementing and enforcing ethics⁤ laws for the federal judiciary, had already examined these allegations and determined in 2012 that Thomas had not failed to disclose any required information regarding travel reimbursements.

It’s not ‌surprising that the Judicial ‍Conference reached this conclusion,​ as there is ample evidence that⁣ this has been the guidance provided to judges all along. For instance, Judge Ray Randolph produced⁤ contemporaneous⁤ notes from 2006,⁤ in which ⁤he received advice from the conference staff stating that he was not obligated to report a flight⁣ on a ​private plane or a​ stay at a lodge in Alaska based on the “personal hospitality” definition outlined in the​ Ethics in Government Act and interpreted by the ​Judicial Conference.

That’s why Thomas⁤ did not ⁣report ⁢his trips ​with Crow and his other friends. The law ⁣recognizes that tallying‌ the number of times⁤ you stay overnight at a friend’s⁢ house, have ⁣dinner with them,‍ or⁣ go on vacation together is not the purpose of the law.

It’s a journalistic disgrace that ProPublica failed to ​mention the Judicial Conference’s 2012 ruling, as it completely undermines the ‍website’s smear campaign suggesting that ​Thomas violated⁤ the law. Instead ‍of acknowledging ⁢this glaring omission, ProPublica has been determined to stick to its false narrative and has spent months searching⁣ for ways to attack the 2012 ruling.

Last week, ProPublica sent an email to Justice Thomas ⁣challenging a statement made by‍ Thomas’ attorney in a⁤ letter​ last August, which accurately stated: “The Judicial Conference issued a letter confirming that Justice Thomas had not improperly failed​ to disclose information concerning his travel.” According to ProPublica’s email, “a ​judge who was on the committee ⁣at the time told us⁤ ‘that couldn’t be further from the truth’‌ because the committee did nothing.”

What is this judge, quoted by ProPublica, referring to? The ⁣Judicial Conference’s April‍ 30, 2012, letter states: “This matter has been reviewed by the Committee on Financial Disclosure of the Judicial Conference ⁣of the United States. It has concluded that nothing​ has been ‌presented to support a determination … ⁤that Justice​ Thomas willfully or improperly failed⁢ to disclose information concerning travel reimbursements.”

ProPublica ⁤expects its readers to believe a judge who seems willing to rewrite history over Thomas’ attorney, who accurately reflected the Judicial Conference’s determination.

In its⁣ email to Thomas, ⁤ProPublica also claims that the Judicial Conference did not investigate these allegations against Thomas and that some judges were troubled by how‌ the ⁣matter was⁤ handled. But why would an investigation be necessary? ​If this travel fell under the personal hospitality ​provision, there⁣ was no obligation to report it. ​This is the‌ exact advice given to ​Judge Randolph and ​likely many other judges. No investigation⁤ was needed.

It’s important to recognize​ these attempts ​by biased media outlets like ProPublica for what they ⁢are: smear campaigns intended⁢ to discredit ​and intimidate conservative ‍justices. Instead of focusing on substantive disagreements and engaging in respectful⁣ debate,⁣ the left-wing media chooses to ‌resort to personal attacks and distortion of facts.

As⁤ responsible citizens, we must be discerning consumers of news and seek ​out reliable and unbiased sources of information. Relying on outlets like⁢ ProPublica, which clearly have an agenda ⁢and ⁢are funded by partisan ‍billionaires, does a⁤ disservice to our democracy and⁣ to the pursuit of truth.

Justice ⁣Clarence Thomas, like‌ any other justice‌ on the Supreme Court, deserves fair treatment and respect. ​It is our‌ responsibility as citizens to ensure⁣ that our judicial system remains​ impartial and free from undue political influence. ​This starts with⁣ rejecting baseless attacks‍ and holding⁢ media organizations accountable for their dishonesty and ⁣bias.