Changes

In a flagrant violation of the rules of the [[United States Senate|Senate]],<ref>[http://www.loc.gov/rr/law/nominations/thomas/debates.pdf Congressional Record -Senate, 102nd Congress, October 7, 1991], Vol 137, Part 18, p. 25706.</ref> staff members<ref>{{cite web |last1=Brock |first1=David |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150212132454/http://www.uiowa.edu/~030116/153/articles/brock01.htm |title=''The Real Anita Hill'' |work=[[University of Iowa]] |date=March 1992 }}</ref> for a sitting [[Democratic]] member of the Judiciary Committee leaked a routine confidential FBI background report to [[Nina Totenberg]] of [[National Public Radio]] (NPR)<ref>[http://backissues.cjrarchives.org/year/92/1/thomas.asp  The Clarence Thomas Hearings], by William Boot, ''Columbia Journalism Review'', January/February 1992.</ref> which contained a vicious defamatory smear intended to mar Thomas for life. The accusation was known to be false, and was concocted to publicly intimidate an African-American Republican from accepting an appointment to the nation's High Court, and derail his nomination. None of the allegations could be substantiated. The deliberate falsehoods did however persuade Ku Klux Klan Grand Cyclops and Democratic [[Senator]] [[Robert Byrd]] to change his vote from "yes" for confirmation to "no".

In a flagrant violation of the rules of the [[United States Senate|Senate]],<ref>[http://www.loc.gov/rr/law/nominations/thomas/debates.pdf Congressional Record -Senate, 102nd Congress, October 7, 1991], Vol 137, Part 18, p. 25706.</ref> staff members<ref>{{cite web |last1=Brock |first1=David |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150212132454/http://www.uiowa.edu/~030116/153/articles/brock01.htm |title=''The Real Anita Hill'' |work=[[University of Iowa]] |date=March 1992 }}</ref> for a sitting [[Democratic]] member of the Judiciary Committee leaked a routine confidential FBI background report to [[Nina Totenberg]] of [[National Public Radio]] (NPR)<ref>[http://backissues.cjrarchives.org/year/92/1/thomas.asp  The Clarence Thomas Hearings], by William Boot, ''Columbia Journalism Review'', January/February 1992.</ref> which contained a vicious defamatory smear intended to mar Thomas for life. The accusation was known to be false, and was concocted to publicly intimidate an African-American Republican from accepting an appointment to the nation's High Court, and derail his nomination. None of the allegations could be substantiated. The deliberate falsehoods did however persuade Ku Klux Klan Grand Cyclops and Democratic [[Senator]] [[Robert Byrd]] to change his vote from "yes" for confirmation to "no".

Liberals have continued to smear Thomas and uncritically believe Hill's claims.<ref>McManus, John F. (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/32174-are-there-no-defenders-of-clarence-thomas Are There No Defenders of Clarence Thomas?] ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref>

Liberals continued to smear Thomas and uncritically believe Hill's claims.<ref>McManus, John F. (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/32174-are-there-no-defenders-of-clarence-thomas Are There No Defenders of Clarence Thomas?] ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref>

==See also==

==See also==