Anthony Weiner must resign -- if Clarence Thomas resigns.
Anthony Weiner must not resign -- if Clarence Thomas does not resign.
See how that works, you sanctimonious junior-varsity scrub Democratic officeholders?
When someone reads that, are they thinking only about Anthony Weiner? Or are they also thinking about something more important?
If Clarence Thomas remains on the Supreme Court, Anthony Weiner has to remain in the House of Representatives, for one simple reason: he's been the only one willing to vigorously challenge Clarence Thomas's financial disclosure scandal -- which is, by the way, one of the reasons that he was targeted to be attacked and humiliated.
If he's not there to carry the ball, who's going to do it?
Are you going to do it, Ed Rendell?
“I think this picture puts it over the limit and I think he has no choice but to resign,” former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said during an evening interview on MSNBC.
I have my doubts. I also have doubts, frankly, whether you yourself could withstand the withering and maniacal investigation that Weiner faced -- although I'm willing to believe that you never sent anyone nude photos of yourself. I also have my doubts that the Republicans would even bother to investigate you like that. You don't threaten them.
How about you, Tim Kaine and Rep. Allyson Schwartz? Have you been calling any attention to Justice Thomas's failure to disclose his wife's income for years and years, even when it potentially impacted cases before him? Have you been talking about his refusal to recuse himself in the Citizen United case despite that group's pivotal role in his winning his (scandal-ridden) confirmation battle?
And hey, Niki Tsongas of Massachusetts, Larry Kissell of North Carolina, Michael Michaud of Maine, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Mike Ross of Arkansas, and Democratic senators Patrick Leahy and Mark Pryor! Are any of you carrying the ball to make Justice Thomas answer the questions the way that Anthony Weiner was pressed to do? Or are you just trying to seem really, really moderate so that the teevee will like you?
The thing I hate most about the Weiner scandal is that it makes Andrew Breitbart look (if you don't look too closely) reasonable. But you guys -- you are making William Saletan look reasonable -- admittedly, a less daunting task -- when he points out your atrocious hypocrisy. Was that your intention?
Nancy Pelosi thinks that Weiner should be investigated -- great! I trust her to make cold-blooded calculations and to have the guts to deliver her verdict to Weiner's face rather than to a cable TV audience.
But I'm drawing the line right here: no Democrat should go after Weiner without mentioning Clarence Thomas -- the subject of the scandal he was pursuing at the time that he was fragged. Treat them as a unit. It's just good politics! Justice Thomas already has crossed the line of creating an appearance of impropriety; he's fair game. Asking for Weiner's resignation without asking for Thomas's -- or, at a minimum, to investigate them both, ideally with the same investigators, and to publish the results at the same time for comparison purposes -- is just political idiocy.
Stop grandstanding. I'll support your (metaphorically) having Anthony Weiner's head on a platter -- if and only if the platter served next to contains Clarence Thomas's. Both or neither -- it's up to you. But this eating our own while the Republicans protect their own has got to stop. It has got to stop. Be smart and pair them up!
I hate to put it this way, but: we're watching you.