NBC's Mitchell Bemoans: Virginia Thomas Interrupted Anita Hill's 'Secluded' Life
NBC's Andrea Mitchell, in a piece aired on Thursday's Today about Virginia Thomas' call to Anita Hill, made a point of tying the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to "conservative causes" but offered no ideological label for Hill. Mitchell also offered two sound bites from Hill supporters, but only featured a brief clip of an old audio-book excerpt from Clarence Thomas expressing sympathy for his wife.
After the NBC correspondent noted that Hill and her "allies" claimed Thomas' request for an apology was "inappropriate" Mitchell aired Harvard Law School Professor Charles Ogletree calling Thomas' behavior "bizarre." Mitchell also featured Jill Abramson, the New York Times reporter and author of the Clarence Thomas bashing book, Strange Justice, questioning the timing of the Supreme Court justice spouse.
Mitchell did play a clip of Clarence Thomas reading from his book My Grandfather's Son, in which the Justice relayed how the two "shared the pain" during his 1991 Senate confirmation hearings, but then went on to bemoan that this new controversy "interrupted the secluded life Hill now leads at Brandeis University."
The following is the full story as it was aired on the October 21 Today show:
ANN CURRY: Now to fallout over that voice mail left for Anita Hill by the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Virginia Thomas wants an apology for the sexual harassment allegations Hill made against her husband 19 years ago. NBC's Andrea Mitchell has the latest on this story. Andrea, good morning.
[On screen headline: "October Surprise, Why Did Virginia Thomas Call Anita Hill Now?"]
ANDREA MITCHELL: Good morning, Ann. Virginia Thomas' surprising voice mail requesting an apology from Anita Hill opened a deep wound in the national psyche, reminding us of the raw emotions at Clarence Thomas's confirmation hearing 19 years ago. Arriving on campus Anita Hill did not want to revisit the feud with Clarence Thomas and now his wife.
ANITA HILL: I am on my way to teach my class and I don't want have any comment, at this point, and I'd really like for you to get out of the street, because I don't want anybody to get hurt.
MITCHELL: Virginia Thomas, now a Tea Party activist, acknowledges leaving a voice mail for Hill, saying, "I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did." Thomas says she meant it as an olive branch. Hill and her allies call it inappropriate, saying she will not apologize because she told the truth.
PROFESSOR CHARLES OGLETREE, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: It dredges up, you know, 19 years of what's happened and it's really unfortunate that we have this bizarre behavior on the 19th anniversary of what was a tragic experience for Professor Hill.
MITCHELL: It was nearly two decades ago. A Supreme Court confirmation hearing that would forever change the way America views charges of sexual harassment.
ANITA HILL: He would turn the conversation to a discussion of sexual matters.
CLARENCE THOMAS: It is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks.
MITCHELL: A searing experience for all involved, including Virginia Thomas, as her husband wrote three years ago in his book, My Grandfather's Son.
THOMAS: It hurt me to know that they were being blared around the world and Virginia shared that pain with me.
MITCHELL: Since his confirmation, Clarence Thomas has been the least vocal of the justices, but his wife is outspoken and unusually partisan for a Supreme Court spouse. A high profile fundraiser for the Tea Party movement and other conservative causes.
VIRGINIA THOMAS: Washington is sick, it's corrupted. There's a bubble over it.
MITCHELL: Her sharp criticism of President Obama and refusal to disclose her donors has gotten attention, 11 days ago on the front page of the New York Times. That story appeared on the 19th anniversary of her husband's Senate showdown with Anita Hill. That same morning, Virginia Thomas called Hill's office.
JILL ABRAMSON, THE NEW YORK TIMES, MANAGING EDITOR: I don't know whether the story, you know, had anything to do with provoking her to call, but it's an interesting coincidence.
MITCHELL: The controversy interrupted the secluded life Hill now leads at Brandeis University.
ANDREW GULLY, BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: It's business as usual. Professor Hill is in class, right now, with her students and as far as we are concerned the, the matter has, has already moved past us.
MITCHELL: Before learning that Virginia Thomas was indeed the caller and not a prankster, the university had called in the FBI, but now the FBI says there is nothing to investigate because no crime was committed. So we are left with a story about the deeply personal and long lasting effects after public humiliation, years after. Ann?
CURRY: That's right. Andrea Mitchell, thank you so much for explaining it all to us this morning.
- Geoffrey Dickens's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
The only "tragic experience" for Hill was Thomas' confirmation
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 4:56pm.
That being said, Mrs. Thomas must have been drinking at the time.
Awwwww, boo hoo, sniff
Submitted by mattm on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:24pm.
Awwwww, boo hoo, sniff sniff... poor little lying Anita Hill, who could have had a secluded and anonymous life if only she hadn't allowed the hate-fill, bigoted, lying left wing to use her as a prop in their quest to destroy one of the finest people in America.
Destroyed? Hardly.
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:27pm.
Destroyed? Hardly.
Jer
Sorry, mattm...I see now that you said "quest" to destroy.
Who released the Voicemail?
Submitted by freecitizen on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:25pm.
How was this voicemail made public? Did Anita Hill release it herself? If that is the case, then Anita Hill interrupted Anita Hill's secluded life.
And they called in the FBI? Really? Fascists(, he says with tongue in cheek)
Damn it! This is why I never
Submitted by bkeyser on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:27pm.
Damn it! This is why I never ran track - too slow...
Second the question-who DID release the voicemail?
Submitted by TexasMom0517 on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:50pm.
Anita Hill or her "people" obviously! All she had to do was
1) Ignore and erase the voicemail
2) Call back and see if it really WAS Ginny Thomas calling and
a)If so, hang up on her or
b)If so, talk to her and tell her she had no intention of apologizing or
c)If so, beg Ginny and Clarence Thomas' forgiveness for trying to destroy them and ask her Higher Power to forgive her transgressions.
Instead, Anita Hill called the FBI (I'm sure on the advice of other far left Progressives) and leaked the voicemail.
Class act, Anita.
d) file a lawsuit
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:56pm.
Wait for it.
I really have little interest
Submitted by bkeyser on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:26pm.
I really have little interest in this ridiculous story -not the MSNBC bias angle since that's the mission of NB; rather the fact that the incident took place. However, I do find it curious that Andrea Mitchell claims that Thomas interupted Hill's secluded life.
This was a voice mail, correct? A message left by party of the incident A to party of the incident B? Presumably on some sort of telecommunication device like a telephone?
If Hill preferred her "seclusion", then how is it that this information became known to the press? It actually seems more plausible that Hill used this voice mail to re-interject her name back into national prominence- far from an act you'd expect from a person wishing to remain relatively secluded.
People on airplanes dressed in Muslim garb make me nervous. -BK
Lonely
Submitted by seven on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 5:59pm.
A black professional female like Anita Hil is more likely to be struck by lightening in the subway that find a man.
She is lonely and bitter. Thomas has a white wife and that doubles her pain.
I'm with the libs on this
Submitted by michiganruth on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 6:40pm.
I remember the hearings. I thought Anita Hill was lying and still do. I read Thomas' autobiography and I think he got a raw deal and I'm so glad he's on the Court.
however...
I have to say I too think Ginny Thomas was out of line. imagine if it was you, and someone you don't like (and who doesn't like you) calls you out of the blue, after years, and suggests that you apologize to her husband?
uh-uh. that's creepy behavior. doesn't matter if Thomas deserves an apology (he does)...this is not the way to get it.
michiganruth...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 6:57pm.
I had a different reaction during the Thomas confirmation hearing, of which I watched almost all of the live televised testimony.
My sympathies were with Thomas and I was inclined to agree with his description of the process as a "high-tech lynching". But I also had the distinct impression that he was not being completely candid with the committee while Hill's version of events had the ring of truth.
However, I believed his conduct toward Hill--even if it were exactly as she described--was crude and inappropriate, but not so egregious that it should scuttle his nomination.
Jer
The whole thing was a trumped
Submitted by mattm on Fri, 10/22/2010 - 11:46am.
The whole thing was a trumped up pile of crap. It's standard practice for the left. If they can't defeat someone in a fair fight, they will use lies and mischaracterization, etc. to do it.
Hill's "version of events" were lies. She was a jealous woman who had vengeance in her heart, the left-wing attack machine used her as a pawn to defame Thomas and derail his nomination. She owes Thomas an apology.
For you to claim that her lies had a "ring or truth" is absolutely ridiculous. I know you try to be reasonable, but this is so outrageous that I have to conclude that any appearance of reasonableness on your part is just a front.
Sorry, but that's how I see it.
I'm sorry too, mattm...But
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 11/03/2010 - 8:40pm.
I'm sorry too, mattm...But that was precisely my view at the time and it remains my view today. No "front"...no contrived "reasonableness". You are free to disagree with every single opinion I post at this website, and I'm sure that you and the overwhelming majority here do disagree with me...emphatically. But they are my actual opinions, honestly stated, and I regret you believe otherwise.
Jer
Anita Hill
Submitted by gunguru on Thu, 10/21/2010 - 7:56pm.
was used as a tool by the left to keep an "uppity black man", who actually lived the American dream, from being seen leaving the liberal plantation for better pastures. I mean, HOW DARE HE not stick to the liberal group-think, and actually raise himself up from poverty through hard work and brains. If he had just towed the line, the Democraps would have left him alone. I knew about the history of racism in the Democrap party, but the hearings really showed me their plantation mentality. If only he had been an unqualified Marxist like Kagan, or a "wise socialist Latina" like Sotomeyer, then Teddy the Swimmer would have approved.