Back there in the stone age of last month, here was the headline on a Washington Post column from associate editor and columnist Ruth Marcus:
It’s time for Clarence Thomas to come clean
In this jewel Marcus writes:
Justice Clarence Thomas has inflicted incalculable damage on the Supreme Court — damage that requires action by Congress and the chief justice to strengthen ethics rules.
In two other columns Marcus zeroes in on Justice Thomas because he had the nerve - the nerve! - to accept “luxury travel” from his friend Harlan Crow. Marcus isn’t alone, either.
On Friday, The Post was headlining a story about longtime conservative judicial activist Leonard Leo directing a payment for services to fellow conservative activist Virginia Thomas, Clarence's wife.
Beneath this lede story on Friday there were - count ’em - nine (!!!) more ethics stories focused on Justice Thomas.
But who, it should be asked, seems to have mysteriously escaped Marcus’s and The Washington Post’s attention?
Here is a headline from another Post - that would be the New York Post.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor didn’t recuse herself from cases involving publisher that paid her $3M: report
The New York Post story reported:
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor didn’t recuse herself from multiple cases involving a book publisher – Penguin Random House – which paid her more than $3 million since 2010, according to a report.
A Google search for coverage of Justice Sotomayor’s $3 million pay day from a publisher who had cases before the Court reveals - shocking I know - not a peep from Marcus or The Washington Post.
Then there’s another missing news story from both The Washington Post and The New York Times. Here’s the headline in The New York Post:
FBI tip that allegedly puts Biden at center of ‘criminal scheme’ sends sleuths around the world
The Washington Examiner version of the same whistleblower story was this headline on a story by ace journalist Quin Hillyer:
Whistleblower’s claims against Biden could be biggest US scandal ever
Quin opens his reporting this way:
OK, this really should be easy: Every news outlet in the country, every law enforcement agency with jurisdiction, every appropriate congressional committee, and the full weight of the FBI should be aggressively probing the Biden family’s financial records.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) say a credible whistleblower alleges that the FBI and Justice Department have a document with a 'precise description' of a 'criminal scheme' between a foreign national and then-Vice President Joe Biden involving payment of money for policy decisions.
So. What do the two stories - on the surface two completely different stories - have in common?
Answer? If a story is a negative on a liberal - be it a liberal Supreme Court Justice or the current liberal President of the United States - then the liberal media will just ignore it. Bury it.
Supreme Court ethics? The subject must be the black conservative Justice Thomas, not the "wise Latina" liberal Justice Sotomayor and her $3 million payout from a publisher on whose “multiple cases” she had sat as a Justice.
A whistleblower who accuses the sitting liberal president of a massive bribery scheme benefitting himself and his family when he was vice president? Yawn. Who cares. Nothing worth reporting here, just move along.
It should come as no surprise, then, that millions of Americans see the attacks on Justice Thomas as just more of the systemic racism of the American Left that rears its head anytime the story revolves around a conservative black man or woman.
There is one standard for Clarence Thomas, another standard altogether for Sonia Sotomayor.
Ditto the liberal media and its lack of coverage of the growing - and potentially massive - bribery scandal surrounding Joe Biden. Nothing to see there, just move along.
The hard core fact here is that the Washington Post’s coverage of Justice Thomas and Virginia Thomas reeks of a left wing vendetta against a conservative Justice. To cite the paper’s lack of coverage of Justice Sotomayor’s would be dismissed as “whataboutism.”
Newsflash? The term “whataboutism” is liberal-speak for “double standard.”
All of which is to say the attacks on Justice Thomas by The Washington Post, columnist Marcus and others are nothing more than the latest attempt at a “high-tech lynching” of a powerful and persuasive conservative black man.
And the studious liberal media silence about the news of a whistleblower pulling back the curtain on Joe Biden and an accused and extensive bribery scandal that traded policies for dollars will similarly wind up only damaging the credibility of the mainstream media even more than its already self-inflicted wounds.
Can the liberal media avoid more damage to their credibility? Maybe - if they come clean about the game they are playing. Will they? Don’t wait up.