Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except the very premise that Ginni Thomas - or Turning Point - funded any buses for 1/6 is a complete lie. Why don't you start there, OP - what else are you lying about?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ginni-thomas-buses/

Don’t expect people here to check their sources.

Oh so Snopes is now a believable source? "Snopes Retracts Dozens of Articles.."

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/business/media/snopes-plagiarism-David-Mikkelson.html

The fact is that Ginni Thomas is a co founder of Turning Point USA,still sits on the board, and Charlie Kirk claimed they sent 80+ buses to the 1-6-2021 protest.

+1
It’s not a proven fact, but let’s not pretend that Ginni Thomas doesn’t stink to high heaven on this. She’s messy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain what threat you believe Ginni poses to scotus.

Did you read the article or is too full of big words? I quoted the title of the article. Clarence Thomas has a ton of conflicts of interest, has failed to honestly report family income, and has never recused himself on cases she is associated with vis her lobbying group, Liberty Consulting. In addition, she's earned more than $650k from Family Research Council who has cases before the Court and Clarence has not recused himself.

I don't believe that poses a threat to scotus. I believe that poses a potential ethics dilemma for Justice Thomas. However, normally your spouse has to be substantially involved in the actual issue at hand. So the fact that she works for a lobbying group doesn't necessarily mean it's an ethics violation, if she is not involved in that issue or unless it appears to create a conflict of interest to a reasonable person. We don't know how long ago she earned money from Family Research Council, etc. There is not enough information in the original post to determine if there is a conflict of interest. Moreover, it is less clear why her activities threaten the entire court.

Shorter you: IOKIYAR.

Republicans always ask (disingenuously; we know you don’t care) why we think the Roberts SC is illegitimate. It’s because of crap like this just being an everyday problem of the court that goes unremarked except every few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except the very premise that Ginni Thomas - or Turning Point - funded any buses for 1/6 is a complete lie. Why don't you start there, OP - what else are you lying about?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ginni-thomas-buses/

So why did Charlie Kirk tweet that?

Charlie Kirk DID brag that TPUSA sent 80 buses. That is a fact. If someone wants to dispute who sent the buses then they need to show receipts and paper trail to its source.
Ginni Thomas WAS INDEED on the board of TPUSA. That is also a fact.
Clarence Thomas REFUSED to recuse on cases relating to organizations that his wife was involved in. That is also a fact.

Whether or not she personally signed the check or whatever else, her involvement with TPUSA is still very problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except the very premise that Ginni Thomas - or Turning Point - funded any buses for 1/6 is a complete lie. Why don't you start there, OP - what else are you lying about?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ginni-thomas-buses/

Don’t expect people here to check their sources.

Oh so Snopes is now a believable source? "Snopes Retracts Dozens of Articles.."

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/business/media/snopes-plagiarism-David-Mikkelson.html

The fact is that Ginni Thomas is a co founder of Turning Point USA,still sits on the board, and Charlie Kirk claimed they sent 80+ buses to the 1-6-2021 protest.

And no doubt you cite Snopes whenever they prove or disprove YOUR claims. The fact is, this claim was proven false. Deal with it.

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/technology/no-there-is-not-evidence-that-ginni-thomas-paid-for-buses-to-bring-people-to-the-capitol-siege.html

[Anonymous]

Thomas is a hack. Court will be much better when he is gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thomas is a hack. Court will be much better when he is gone.

And the fact that Biden basically went to bat for him while tearing apart Anita Hill and didn’t bother to apologize until this last run for the Presidency when she became the ‘Anita problem’ is what always comes to my mind when I hear anything about Thomas these days.

I know she eventually supported him, but a lot of us did because he was the only option. It still makes me upset though.

[Anonymous]

If you believe Justice Thomas has committed an ethical violation, have you reported it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thomas is a hack. Court will be much better when he is gone.

And the fact that Biden basically went to bat for him while tearing apart Anita Hill and didn’t bother to apologize until this last run for the Presidency when she became the ‘Anita problem’ is what always comes to my mind when I hear anything about Thomas these days.

I know she eventually supported him, but a lot of us did because he was the only option. It still makes me upset though.

I completely agree. I get that Biden may have grown, and some of that growth might have occurred when he was Obama’s VP, but I will always remember the hearings — and the way that other women, whose testimonies would have provided a context for Anita Hill’s , were not called upon to share their experiences. Despite his “apology”, I don’t think Biden gets it, or truly acknowledges the role that pragmatic African American women played in his presidential win.

There are multiple Justices on the Court, starting with Thomas, that I don’t think deserve to be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except the very premise that Ginni Thomas - or Turning Point - funded any buses for 1/6 is a complete lie. Why don't you start there, OP - what else are you lying about?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ginni-thomas-buses/

Don’t expect people here to check their sources.

Oh so Snopes is now a believable source? "Snopes Retracts Dozens of Articles.."

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/business/media/snopes-plagiarism-David-Mikkelson.html

The fact is that Ginni Thomas is a co founder of Turning Point USA,still sits on the board, and Charlie Kirk claimed they sent 80+ buses to the 1-6-2021 protest.

And no doubt you cite Snopes whenever they prove or disprove YOUR claims. The fact is, this claim was proven false. Deal with it.

I'm sorry. Do you know me? Then you know I don't cite Snopes. They are wrong. She is still on the board of Turning Point. Charlie bragged they sent 80+ buses.

[Anonymous]

She is nuts. Perfectly pleasant, but nuts. The paranoia runs deep.

Speaking from personal experience.

[Anonymous]

There is a new champion in the ‘what if the left did it’ competition
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/21/there-is-new-champion-what-if-left-did-it-competition/

Imagine a liberal Supreme Court justice, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1993. Really, though, liberal doesn’t sufficiently convey her ideology. She’s hard-left, regularly an exception in court decisions in a way that reflects that stance. In public appearances, she makes her predilections clear, if often only obliquely.

Her husband, however, makes his politics far more explicit. He’s a public activist, promoting and assisting a range of far-left organizations and personalities. The sorts of organizations that are considered well to the left of the norm even among left-leaning organizations. A Planned Parenthood affiliate fundraises by explicitly offering the chance to meet “the husband of a Supreme Court justice.” Apparently thanks to his wife’s position, he finagles an audience with President Biden, bringing along others from the leftist fringe. There, he insists that Biden fire disloyal people in his administration and, to aid that cause, hands over a list of names.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you believe Justice Thomas has committed an ethical violation, have you reported it?

😂

[Anonymous]

I hate wives who don’t have their own identity and glob onto their husband’s careers. It’s gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a new champion in the ‘what if the left did it’ competition
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/21/there-is-new-champion-what-if-left-did-it-competition/

Imagine a liberal Supreme Court justice, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1993. Really, though, liberal doesn’t sufficiently convey her ideology. She’s hard-left, regularly an exception in court decisions in a way that reflects that stance. In public appearances, she makes her predilections clear, if often only obliquely.

Her husband, however, makes his politics far more explicit. He’s a public activist, promoting and assisting a range of far-left organizations and personalities. The sorts of organizations that are considered well to the left of the norm even among left-leaning organizations. A Planned Parenthood affiliate fundraises by explicitly offering the chance to meet “the husband of a Supreme Court justice.” Apparently thanks to his wife’s position, he finagles an audience with President Biden, bringing along others from the leftist fringe. There, he insists that Biden fire disloyal people in his administration and, to aid that cause, hands over a list of names.

GOP don’t care. They have zero love for America and even less desire to follow any annoying little things like “ethics.”