A number of articles have appeared, by Conservative people who know Mr. Crow personally, agreeing with his stated view that statues and memorabilia represent his dislike of totalitarianism. This claim is hard to evaluate.
However, it is odd. His proponents accept his explanation. But people upset by dictators and their policies generally have sympathy for their victims and think of them when remembering abuses. A copy of paintings or books or statues does nothing whatsoever to remember the victims of inhumane government. No one, nearly, can say which causes people donate dark money to, and Mr. Crow does not. Has he donated moneys to help victims? He is perhaps entitled to benefit of the doubt. But his explanation is slightly odd.
ISTM the question is would the government come down on me hard if I did the same thing?
I messed up on my taxes one year (very minor). The IRS literally called me, said I owed $300 and I paid on the spot over the phone. Done and done.
I was no criminal tax evader. I made a simple mistake, they knew it was a mistake, and it got sorted with one phone call.
If it can be said Thomas made a simple mistake on his taxes and corrects it then fine. I am not so sure this is a simple mistake though. I think the IRS is aware of common mistakes and aware of tax evasion.
Let them do to Thomas as they would do to anyone else.
I can remember at school (circa 30 years ago) being disturbed when visiting a (apologies for bad terminology) Jewish memorial or museum or something of the like and there was a room set-up with Nazi memorabilia - the reason given at the time was exactly what is being given here, we hate it, but are doing it to remember…
Agreed - at a minimum, this appears to have been not just one simple mistake of mis-attribution of income to a defunct company, but making the same “mistake” for a decade or more.
Our African American Affinity group did something similar at my work place ages ago for Black History month. They had some slave shackles on display. It was very powerful to see and touch them. Really brought the evil home in a visceral way.
I don’t think you can draw firm conclusions. Billionaires are eccentric to begin with, and historical artifacts are interesting. However, his defenders also presumably do not know where he donates his money, and Mr. Crow declines to say. A munificent man; doing his bit to aid friends with no thought of reward or recompense. Honi soit qui mal y pense.
To quote Bette Midler, if you’re incapable of understanding financial disclosure forms, you shouldn’t be interpreting the Constitution. I don’t buy the innocent mistake notion. He’s thumbing his nose at the law because he thinks he’s above the law, and by all indications he’s right.
Our Canuck PM is in the news for visiting long-time friends in Jamaica. It was not secret. The ethics committee was said to have reviewed it. The opposition is displeased.
I thought it was odd too, as the IRS really drills into you that they never call to ask for money. However…
Will the Illinois Department of Revenue ever call or email me directly if I owe taxes?
The Illinois Department of Revenue’s Collections Program Area does use electronic (email) and telephone communications as a means to resolve tax deficiencies. This differs from the Internal Revenue Service who advertises that they will not call you personally.
If you receive a phone call or email from IDOR, you can verify its authenticity by logging into your MyTax account at MyTax.illinois.gov. Your MyTax Illinois account will provide an alert and a phone number to call if you have been referred to our Collections Program Area. If you do not have a MyTax Illinois account, contact our Collections Program Area Call Unit at 217-785-2698 to verify.
It turns out, CT’s hands might not be immaculate, and the “arms-length” thing may only go to the wrist … maybe:
But a close look at Thomas’s judicial activities from the time he became friends with Crow, in the mid-1990s, suggests that the statement might fall short of the full picture. It reveals that a conservative organization affiliated with Crow did have business before the supreme court while Thomas was on the bench.
While this is not Thomas it does add to the Supreme Court seeming to be largely devoid of any ethical constraints:
Full Title: Jane Roberts, who is married to Chief Justice John Roberts, made $10.3 million in commissions from elite law firms, whistleblower documents show
To add even more to the sense that they can do what they want:
While I don’t necessarily think it was their intention, it’s a good thing for advocates of court ethics reform that the liberal justices signed onto this (ridiculous) statement. Court reform is being painted by Republicans as a liberal plot against Clarence Thomas and other conservative judges in order to overturn the work Trump did to stack the judiciary. By making clear that arrogance over being subjected to ethics rules extends across all members of the Supreme Court, it makes it easier to portray this as a nonpartisan effort to bring accountability to the judiciary as an institution.