RUTHFULLY YOURS

Earlier this month, ProPublica attempted to smear Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, implying in its reporting that he was compromised due to his friendship with real estate mogul and billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow based on the holidays the Thomas family spent with the Crow family.

It led many Democrats who themselves have engaged in ethically questionable behavior to besmirch Thomas.

The high priestess of liberal hypocrisy, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), a.k.a. AOC, who is being investigated by the House Ethics Committee for possible violation of congressional rules for accepting impermissible gifts, is one of the loudest advocates of branding Thomas as corrupt and demanding his impeachment.

The mainstream news media, which is a P.R. wing of the Democrats, amplified the chaos.

The target now is Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch.

Just yesterday, Politico carried a hit piece with a provocative headline: “Law firm head bought Gorsuch-owned property.”

The gist of the claims in the piece is as follows:

·      Gorsuch was seeking a buyer for a 40-acre tract of property he co-owned in rural Granby, Colorado since 2015.

·      In 2017, nine days after Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate on the Supreme Court, the property found a buyer in Brian Duffy who is the CEO at Greenberg Traurig, one of the biggest law firms in the US.

·      Duffy and his wife purchased the property for an amount of $1.825 million;according to a deed in the county’s record system.

·      Gorsuch, who held a 20 percent stake, reported making roughly between $250,001 and $500,000 from the sale on his federal disclosure forms.

·      Gorsuch didn’t disclose the identity of the buyer in his disclosure form.

·      Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court. In the 12 cases where Gorsuch’s opinion is recorded, he sided with Greenberg Traurig’s clients eight times and against them four times.

The implication here is a conflict of interest and a deliberate and malicious concealment of information.

So let’s look at the concealment allegation first and Gorsuch revealing the income from the sale in federal disclosure forms. This is hardly a malicious suppression of vital information.

The Federalist’s David Harsanyi examined all the disclosure forms of other Supreme Court Justices in 2017, “and none of them made a single notation in that column for any transaction.”

For instance, Justice Sotomayor receives rent but there is no mention of the names of the tenant, perhaps for confidentiality purposes.

The Gorsuch disclosure seems consistent with the existing standards.

Now about the accusation of conflict of interest.

The Politico piece mentions that Brian Duffy said he has never met or spoken with Gorsuch.

Harsanyi revealed that Duffy appears to be a Democrat who donates mostly to other Democrats such as Raphael Warnock, Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer, and Barack Obama.

Politico presented no evidence that Gorsuch was compromised.

Politico hasn’t provided any proof that Gorsuch has adjudicated in favor of Duffy’s clients despite there being overwhelming evidence of Duffy’s clients’ guilt.

Politico doesn’t mention any specific laws or ethical standards that Gorsuch violated.

Much like the Pro-Publica hit piece on Thomas, the report relies on innuendo and implication, allowing the reader to infer that there is something fishy.

Thomas and Gorsuch are being attacked for the same reason that Trump is, was, and always will be unfairly attacked.

Anyone who is a challenger to the D.C. Democrat establishment and its groupthink will be the target of a persistent smear campaign.

The goal is to create a perception.

Whenever Gorsuch’s name is mentioned, they provide the context that he was accused of a conflict of interest, they can mention the sale of a property of $1.825 million without making it clear that he co-owned the property.

In the mind of casual news consumers, the narrative is that Gorsuch surrendered judicial independence for a sum of $1.825 million. A lie told a million times eventually becomes the truth. Few bother to fact-check, they believe all they see in the media.

Similar claims were made about Thomas and will doubtlessly be made about other conservative justices.

This debunks the theory that Trump is a target because of his ‘baggage,’ i.e., Trump’s ‘mean’ Tweets and ‘brutish’ behavior.

They are a target because of their behavior or utterances, but because of what they stand for.

The other reason for this focused targeting is that the Supreme Court has a clear conservative majority which makes them a formidable impediment against their tyranny.

They cannot punish their political opponents or send someone to jail for ‘misgendering’ until they have control of the Supreme Court.

If they manage to force Thomas or Gorsuch out, they hope he will be replaced by a liberal justice.

If they cannot evict Thomas and Gorsuch from the Supreme Court, they hope to at least creates such a strong perception that the judges are forcing them to recuse themselves from key rulings which will tilt the balance in favor of liberals.

It began with President Trump, then the targeted Supreme Court Justice Thomas, the day before it was Tucker Carlson, yesterday it was Gorsuch, tomorrow it could be you and your loved ones.

Their end goal is to outlaw dissent and have a single-party system.

The time of passive reactions, refutations, and condemnations is long gone.

It’s time for the GOP and the conservative media to be on the offensive and drive, not react, to the narrative.

Remaining neutral in a battle of morals is siding with the tyrant.