Thank you. Ms. Divine. Thank you, mr. Maguire, for being here. We appreciate your life of Public Service. My question relates to prior to the transmission on august 26 from the ig to the dni, were there any conversations that you had with the ig prior to august 26 related to this matter . Congresswoman, theres been a lot thats happened in the last several weeks. As far as the timeline is concerned, i think that id like to get back to you and give you a full chronology if i may on the actual timeline of events. That would be very helpful to this committee in terms of, if there were any preliminary conversation, what was discussed and if there was any action taken as a result of those conversations. I want to turn to the complaint itself which is made public for the American Public to read. Let me preface this by saying i greatly appreciate your statement that you believe the whistleblower is operating in
good faith. I think thats very important for americans to hear. But on page one, an
would require alito to disclose all of this, when it happened in 2008, for that have since been updated? he gets into the weeds but the law issued here, was passed after watergate. kind of the area of good government reform. the law has not changed. all the ethics lawyers we spoke to say getting a gift of a private jet flight should have been disclosed. justice alito maintains the filing instructns did not require him to disclose it. but, i will note as we say in the peace, we found examples of multiple other federal judges, disclosing guests of private jet flights at the time. really important reporting, everyone should read it. justin elliott, thank you very much. a development in the search for the missing submersible, underwater banging has been detected. what it means for the passengers on board and will rescuers be able to reach them, before they run out of air. .
reported in your piece that while justice thomas did not expose harlan crow s payments he hasn t thomas did disco disclose another payment from a different brand back in 2002. why the apparent inconsistency on what he is able to report to not report when he gets these financial gaps? it is another question that we would love to have a good answer to but justice thomas has not responded to our questions on that. all the ethics lawyers we spoke to said that these two russian payments by harlan crow should have been discussed by justice thomas s annual filing and as you say it is a totally unexplained and disparagement it is a few years earlier justice thomas gave a much smaller gift for the education of the same relative from another friend who is just a random individual not involved in politics like harlan crow justin, so far republicans in congress have been saying that the supreme court can police itself but
recently changed. the controversy was first reported by the nonprofit media outlet propublica. and one of the reporters who worked on the story told cnn. some ethics lawyers disagree with justice thomas listen. clarence thomas appears to be referring to there is the ethics in government act . it s a law that was passed after watergate that by law requires many government officials, including supreme court justices to disclose most gifts they received to the public. and so after justice thomas released a statement the day after our story published we went to seven ethics law experts , including former lawyers, former ethics lawyers for the white house and congress, and we asked him about it. we asked him about the law, and all of them said that, clarence thomas, um you know, the law clearly required that things like private jet trips be disclosed, and that if thomas is arguing otherwise, he s incorrect. um i
this travel, as you described. i, mean the private jet we r talking about, it s bombardier global fact as in these things one for anywhere between ten t $15,000 per hour so, if you re flying t indonesia like one of thes flights that clarence thomas stuck with harlan crow, th donor, that could be a multi hundred dollar flight alone. but here s the thing that will cause people to set their hair on fire as unethical or reprehensibl as this may be, if it s true is it technically against th rules? did clarence thomas, was h required to disclose it? we looked at that questio very closely with ethics lawyers, and they told us, yes he had - there s a law that was passe in the 1970s, after th watergate scandal that cover supreme court justices that requires him to repor gifts on their annual financia