About That Apology, Ginni…

From The Washington Post:

For nearly two decades, Lillian McEwen has been silent — a part of history, yet absent from it.

When Anita Hill accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment during his explosive 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearing, Thomas vehemently denied the allegations and his handlers cited his steady relationship with another woman in an effort to deflect Hill’s allegations.

Lillian McEwen was that woman.

Original DVD cover

At the time, she was on good terms with Thomas. The former assistant U.S. attorney and Senate Judiciary Committee counsel had dated him for years, even attending a March 1985 White House state dinner as his guest. She had worked on the Hill and was wary of entering the political cauldron of the hearings. She was never asked to testify, as then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), who headed the committee, limited witnesses to women who had a “professional relationship” with Thomas.

Now, she says that Thomas often said inappropriate things about women he met at work — and that she could have added her voice to the others, but didn’t.


Today, McEwen is 65 and retired from a successful career as a prosecutor, law professor and administrative law judge for federal agencies.


And she is silent no more.

She has written a memoir, which she is now shopping to publishers. News broke that the justice’s wife, Virginia Thomas, left a voice mail on Hill’s office phone at Brandeis University, seeking an apology — a request that Hill declined in a statement. After that, McEwen changed her mind and decided to talk about her relationship with Thomas.

“I have nothing to be afraid of,” she said, adding that she hopes the attention stokes interest in her manuscript.

To McEwen, Hill’s allegations that Thomas had pressed her for dates and made lurid sexual references rang familiar.

“He was always actively watching the women he worked with to see if they could be potential partners,” McEwen said matter-of-factly. “It was a hobby of his.”

In her Senate testimony, Hill, who worked with Thomas at two federal agencies, said that Thomas would make sexual comments to her at work, including references to scenes in hard-core pornographic films.

“If I used that kind of grotesque language with one person, it would seem to me that there would be traces of it throughout the employees who worked closely with me, or the other individuals who heard bits and pieces of it or various levels of it,” Thomas responded to the committee.

McEwen scoffs softly when asked about Thomas’s indignation, which has barely cooled in the 19 years since the hearings. In his vivid 2007 memoir, the justice calls Hill a tool of liberal activists outraged because he did not fit their idea of what an African American should believe.


[McEwen’s memoir] includes explicit details of her relationship with Thomas, which she said included a freewheeling sex life.

Given that history, she said Hill’s long-ago description of Thomas’s behavior resonated with her.

“He was obsessed with porn,” she said of Thomas, who is now 63. “He would talk about what he had seen in magazines and films, if there was something worth noting.”


According to McEwen, Thomas would also tell her about women he encountered at work. He was partial to women with large breasts, she said. In an instance at work, Thomas was so impressed that he asked one woman her bra size, McEwen recalled him telling her.

Presented with some of McEwen’s assertions, Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said Thomas was unavailable for comment.

However bizarre they may seem, McEwen’s recollections resemble accounts shared by other women that swirled around the Thomas confirmation.

Angela Wright, who in 1984 worked as public affairs director at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission — which polices sexual harassment claims — during Thomas’s long tenure as chairman, shared similar accounts with Senate investigators.

Once, when walking into an EEOC seminar with Thomas, he asked her, “What size are your breasts?” according to the transcript of her Senate interview.

Her story was corroborated by a former EEOC speechwriter, who told investigators that Wright had become increasingly uneasy around Thomas because of his comments about her appearance.


Another woman, Sukari Hardnett, who worked as a special assistant to Thomas in 1985 and 1986, wrote in a letter to the Judiciary Committee that “If you were young, black, female and reasonably attractive, you knew full well you were being inspected and auditioned as a female” by Thomas.


Through the years, McEwen said, she has remained reasonably friendly with Thomas. On two or three occasions, she said, she brought friends to his Supreme Court chambers where they sat for long conversations.

But now, she says, “I know Clarence would not be happy with me.”

“I have no hostility toward him,” McEwen said. “It is just that he has manufactured a different reality over time. That’s the problem that he has.”


Filed under Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas, humor, Joe Biden, movies, parody, politics, Republicans, Scandals, Senate, Senate Judiciary Committee, Sexual Harassment, snark, Supreme Court, Wordpress Political Blogs

42 responses to “About That Apology, Ginni…

  1. 😆 ARrrGgghhhhhhhhhhhhhh! There’s a pube on the coke!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 😆

  2. Clarence Thomas, the gift that keeps on giving for conservatives and big business. Barf.

  3. jeb

    I hope that between Ginny’s call and McEwen’s book that the whole thing flares up again. I ‘d say we need a good impeachment about now!

    • jeb

      ugh, typing and watching the ball game. too many mistakes. GO RANGERS!

      • reread the comment and see if that’s what you wanted to say, jeb. i thought that maybe your T key was broken. my space bar was acting up last week, so i pried it off and cleaned it, and it’s okay now.

        it’s too bad being an asswipe is not an impeachable offense. one of the votes on the floriduhhh ballot is whether or not to retain charles canady on the state supreme court. now, i don’t really follow the floriduhhh supremes, but i knew that name immediately. he was one of the asswipes on the rethug impeachment team back in ’92. i’m telling everyone i know to vote to kick him the hell out.

        • jeb

          Yep, it was my old laptop with the funky T key because my son was using my new laptop. Thanks for fixing that.

          Too bad impeachment is used for a political tool instead of that for which it’s intended. Scalia accepting a duck hunting trip with Cheney before a big vote that Scalia followed Cheney’s line on? Nothing untoward there. Ginny profiting off of her husband’s position? You know if those guys had been picked by Dems, the Baggers and Rethugs would be screaming loudly about how we must protect the integrity of the Court.

          • the dems need to study some rethug tapes and learn how to scream and get everyone else as outraged as they should be at the rethuglican shenanigans. it’s unbelievable how much they get away with, because they’re bullies, and the dems and the media are scared shitless of them.

      • HYSTERICAL NOTE: Texas Rangers winning World Series is one of the signs of the end of days and the world coming to an end !!

        • i love baseball, but i very rarely watch it. in fact, i usually only watch the world series. i will be rooting for the giants. i hope the rangers will be forced to use charlie crist as a pitcher.

  4. jean-philippe

    Must be awkward for the judges to debate with Thomas pulling “that’s what she said” jokes all the time.

  5. Latte Liberal

    i’m sorry, i apologize in advance, i know we’re supposed to be all light and fluffy here and stuff, and funny whenever possible, but my inner girl finds this sort of behavior so effin outrageous, that i cannot be tongue-in-cheek about it.

    back in ’91 i gave clarence [spit] thomas the benefit of the doubt. regarding Anita Hill, but not regarding his intelligence. as time passed, his absolute inanity and utter uselessness on the Court has shined through.

    a few stories here and there corroborating Ms Hills peeked through, afair, mostly whispers, but no Gennifer Flowers/Paula Jones. and now we have this bombshell.

    i understand Lillian McEwen had a career to worry about, retaliation, being dragged through the mud…but really? Why are ALL the GOP’s have to be Ken “Bud” Mehlmans? Why come out so many years AFTER the fact as to expose their own inadequacy?

    Why does their Holy Grail have to shift a full 180 as when it’s most convenient to them? “The Greater Cause” in both cases was protecting the GOP and the status quo. Myopic, selfish, safe.

    And now? The Greater Cause is the truth, finally. But serving the truth in both cases is what? Selfish and safe and filled with $$ of self-promotion.

    Fucking assholes. Sorry. They are.
    Clarence Thomas didn’t have to be. He wouldn’t have been, had Lillian spake thusly 20 years back.
    Shame on you, Lillian.
    Selfish Republican fill in the blank.

    ~ Latte

    • no need to apologize, latte. i understand your frustration, but not everyone is courageous. i can understand that she had a daughter who was around 12 at the time, and she wouldn’t have wanted to jeopardize her own employment. i don’t know if it would have mattered much if she did testify. the rethugs would have maligned her as much as they did anita hill. they would have said she was a jilted woman with a grudge.

      • Latte Liberal

        nonnie, i was careful to spell out the nature of my frustration. i understand the fear of retribution and retaliation from an angry GOP mob. i respect her reasons for staying mum.

        it’s that combination with coming out LATER, when not only is de facto irrelevant and also serves to underscore the aforementioned frustration, but speaks blatantly of self-serving interests, financial and otherwise of those who discover “Jesus” so late in life.

        • i understand where you’re coming from, latte, and i share your frustration. i’ve read different accounts. most of them say she remained mum 19 years ago, and a couple of them say she did say something, but testimony was limited to women who worked with ol’ clarence, not those who had personal relationships with him.

          i try to think what i might have done if i had been in her position. after several hours of projectile vomiting at the thought of being near that vile piece of shit, let alone actually sleeping with him, i honestly don’t think i would have done anything differently. i was a single mom, and i don’t think i would have jeopardized my job, especially if i was living in such a small bubble like d.c. is. as for her coming forth now, i guess it’s better late than never. her trying to sell a book leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but whatever her motives, it’s good that the truth will come out. i’m hoping that this will spell the end of the reign of orrin hatch. he keeps vilifying anita hill and defending the thomases. i would love to see a woman take down that asswipe. it would be poetic justice (no pun intended).

  6. i can imagine the 5 republican rightwing justices (scalia, alito, kennedy, thomas and roberts) all sitting around playing poker, smoking cigars, chugging beers and telling jokes about ginsburg, kagan and sotomayor

    thomas’ can of budweiser would have pubes of course – while the other 4 would laugh at that

    seriously – how do the three women on the court sit in the same room with that perv – and how does the country let someone like him stay on the court – forget about The Pubic Adventures – what about the fact he may be the worst, most useless, most partisan and dumbest SCOTUS judge in history

    ps – Orrin Hatch is a real piece of shit – he is defending Ginny

    • Latte Liberal

      i’d add to that, had McEwen spoken up in time, we would not have had dubya v Gore disaster, and consequently the Iraq war and arguably even 9/11. In his first half a year of presidency, Gore would not have been “hands off” on the foreign policy and needed a wake up call to stop ignoring Middle East. He would not have sent “bibles and prayers” to the downed US spy plane in China. Et cetera.

      • jean-philippe

        Bush Sr. would have still appointed a conservative lackey who would have sided for the dark side in W v. Gore.

        • Latte Liberal

          good point.
          though some, like Stevens do come around. Ford/Nixon, to be sure would be today’s RINO’s.

          ~ Latte, an optimist.

        • ‘zactly! the one i really have no forgiveness for is sandra day o’connor. she knew she was wrong, and she ruled the wrong way anyway. i don’t care how much she tries to make nice now, i hate that bitch.

      • like i said upthread, i don’t know if mcewen would have made a difference. even with her coming out now, orrin hatch is still defending the thomases. yeah, everyone else in the world is lying, and those 2 are telling the truth. 🙄

    • I suspect Clarence’s age, immense girth and possibly diabetes is drastically affecting Long Dong Silver’s ability to act up anymore.
      Plus, I suspect a man’s sexual appetite diminishes when he looks down and can no longer see his penis through the flab and folds.
      And it’s probably a lot harder to see a pube on a Coke can when the pube is gray.

    • oh, dcAp, you are so, so wrong!!!! alito would have a mint julep, and roberts would be sipping a cosmopolitan. and they would be playing canasta while the fellas played poker.

  7. Texanna

    Clarence Thomas’ wife knows deep in her heart that Anita is telling the truth. Otherwise, why bring it up after all these years? She either believes in her husband or she doesn’t.

    • hello texanna,

      welcome to the raisin! 😀

      i think the best proof that ol’ ginni knows that ol’ clarence was up to something back then is how she worded her message. she wanted an explanation of what hill did WITH her husband, not TO her husband. i thought i was the only one who had grabbed onto that tidbit, but bill maher mentioned it on real time last night. i screamed thank you at the tv.

  8. I knew this was coming, lol. Good post, thanks 🙂

  9. jean-philippe

    If you’re not tired of Thomas, this movie would be very cool… 😛

  10. jean-philippe


  11. Pingback: NYTimes – Maureen Dowd – Supreme Bad Judgement « Harford for Obama

  12. Remarks after a big ruling this year stated that Thomas, using old common law rationalizations would allow a seven year old to be put to death for a theft over $50 value. Won’t argue with that assesment.

    • of course, that’s only the case if the 7-year-old steals from a rich person. if he steals from a poor or middle class person, it’s not even a real crime.

  13. I wonder if she’s gonna call those other women too?

    Anita is a lot better than me; by the time she hung up that phone, I’d be on her doorstep introducin’ her to a serious beatdown.

    Dont call me PERIOD, and then about some 20 yr old bs?

    She needs to ask her CrunchBerry Beast of a husband to apologize for bein’ a sex-crazed pervert, and move on with her life.

    • hello datgurl!

      welcome to the raisin! 😀

      i spent some time at your site earlier today, alternately laughing and picking my jaw off the floor.

      hope you visit again soon. 🙂