Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I know he wouldn't ultimately be convicted. But it would keep the conflicts of interest and January 6th continually in the public eye. January 6th was the lowest point in American democracy since the Civil War and Trump wanted to turn the US into an autocratic dictatorship and a substantial number of members of Congress wanted to help him do it.
And the loonies have spent the last 18 months trying to purge the Republican party of those remaining members who DID do the right thing.

So here's the thing. You're basically suggesting using constitutional processes and the power of the government to further a political party's agenda. That is exactly what was happening in the prior administration. Let's just stop doing that. All of us, regardless of party.

So the Ds should just look the other way? Disregard corruption because it might benefit them?

Ridiculous given how the Rs have actually abused their powers for their own benefit and to support illegal behavior.

I'm not suggesting that nothing be done. I'm supportive of the 1/6 commission, and any prosecutions that result. I'm also supportive of everybody talking about it publicly, etc. What I am not in favor of doing is impeaching a justice "for show" and to create spectacle.

I agree. No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached. Another lost impeachment hearing will cost Democrats in the long run. Shame him into retirement or charge his wife criminally or both. Keep her conspiracy to overthrow our government in the news.

Maybe Mrs. Thomas runs into some issues, though I don’t know how you sanction her for using her right to speak freely. But the notion that Justice Thomas must resign underscores the Democrat plot against America. You can’t hand Biden an illegitimate chance to fill another SCOTUS seat. People forget that Justice Thomas did nothing wrong.

If somehow Justice Thomas is forced out or driven to death, his seat needs to be held open until his party takes the Presidency. It’s only fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I know he wouldn't ultimately be convicted. But it would keep the conflicts of interest and January 6th continually in the public eye. January 6th was the lowest point in American democracy since the Civil War and Trump wanted to turn the US into an autocratic dictatorship and a substantial number of members of Congress wanted to help him do it.
And the loonies have spent the last 18 months trying to purge the Republican party of those remaining members who DID do the right thing.

So here's the thing. You're basically suggesting using constitutional processes and the power of the government to further a political party's agenda. That is exactly what was happening in the prior administration. Let's just stop doing that. All of us, regardless of party.

So the Ds should just look the other way? Disregard corruption because it might benefit them?

Ridiculous given how the Rs have actually abused their powers for their own benefit and to support illegal behavior.

I'm not suggesting that nothing be done. I'm supportive of the 1/6 commission, and any prosecutions that result. I'm also supportive of everybody talking about it publicly, etc. What I am not in favor of doing is impeaching a justice "for show" and to create spectacle.

I agree. No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached. Another lost impeachment hearing will cost Democrats in the long run. Shame him into retirement or charge his wife criminally or both. Keep her conspiracy to overthrow our government in the news.

Maybe Mrs. Thomas runs into some issues, though I don’t know how you sanction her for using her right to speak freely. But the notion that Justice Thomas must resign underscores the Democrat plot against America. You can’t hand Biden an illegitimate chance to fill another SCOTUS seat. People forget that Justice Thomas did nothing wrong.

If somehow Justice Thomas is forced out or driven to death, his seat needs to be held open until his party takes the Presidency. It’s only fair.

You forgot your sarcasm tag.

[Anonymous]

One of those not remotely as serious as Ginni Thomas being a treasonous b who the GOP is protecting, but illustrative of the kind of crap person of the GOP:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking into this further, it looks like the decision that Thomas dissented in did NOT lead to the release of his wife's emails?

"This January, Clarence Thomas was the sole dissenter in a proceeding in which Trump asked the Court to stop the House investigative committee from obtaining records of his communications relating to efforts to subvert the 2020 election results. It is unclear whether Trump’s records would have implicated Ginni Thomas. Meadows filed an amicus brief in the case, in support of Trump’s claims of executive privilege, and at the time Meadows’s lawyers were arguing that his coöperation with congressional investigators depended on whether Trump would be ordered to comply himself. Yet, by that point, Meadows had already turned over to the congressional committee some twenty-three hundred texts—and, according to the Washington Post, they included the twenty-nine-message exchange between him and Ginni Thomas."
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/legal-scholars-are-shocked-by-ginni-thomass-stop-the-steal-texts

Replying here as well but don’t post the exact same stuff here and in the Clarence Thomas thread.

It’s weird because there was a period when Meadows was cooperating and then he wasn’t. Also during that period his PAC got a million dollar donation from Trump’s PAC. This is all in the big January 6 Commission thread months and months ago. It’s sort of irrelevant because if Meadows hadn’t started cooperating, the SCOTUS decision would have made the texts available to the 1/6 Commission whether they were in the “hey I’m cooperating” batch of evidence or not.

Who made you the forum moderator? I had not seen this. Maybe you don't want their criminal activity to be uncovered. IMO Ginni is a traitor and deserves what traitors get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I know he wouldn't ultimately be convicted. But it would keep the conflicts of interest and January 6th continually in the public eye. January 6th was the lowest point in American democracy since the Civil War and Trump wanted to turn the US into an autocratic dictatorship and a substantial number of members of Congress wanted to help him do it.
And the loonies have spent the last 18 months trying to purge the Republican party of those remaining members who DID do the right thing.

So here's the thing. You're basically suggesting using constitutional processes and the power of the government to further a political party's agenda. That is exactly what was happening in the prior administration. Let's just stop doing that. All of us, regardless of party.

So the Ds should just look the other way? Disregard corruption because it might benefit them?

Ridiculous given how the Rs have actually abused their powers for their own benefit and to support illegal behavior.

I'm not suggesting that nothing be done. I'm supportive of the 1/6 commission, and any prosecutions that result. I'm also supportive of everybody talking about it publicly, etc. What I am not in favor of doing is impeaching a justice "for show" and to create spectacle.

I agree. No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached. Another lost impeachment hearing will cost Democrats in the long run. Shame him into retirement or charge his wife criminally or both. Keep her conspiracy to overthrow our government in the news.

Maybe Mrs. Thomas runs into some issues, though I don’t know how you sanction her for using her right to speak freely. But the notion that Justice Thomas must resign underscores the Democrat plot against America. You can’t hand Biden an illegitimate chance to fill another SCOTUS seat. People forget that Justice Thomas did nothing wrong.

If somehow Justice Thomas is forced out or driven to death, his seat needs to be held open until his party takes the Presidency. It’s only fair.

There are no republican or democrat seats on the Supreme Court. You need a civics lesson.

Plotting to overthrow a free and fair election is not free speech. It remains to be proven that Clarence did something wrong but I'm of the opinion that he probably did. Guilty people act guilty and he certainly is. My mind keeps going back to Ginni's partner and co founder of Turning Point that day after the insurrection. He proudly tweeted that they paid for 80 bus loads. It was deleted but someone somewhere must have a screen shot. If true she funded the insurection. Clarence retiring does not give Biden an "illegitimate" pick for the Supreme Court. If there's an opening during President Biden's term it must be filled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I found the actual letter and signatories on the "alliance for Justice" page: https://www.afj.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Justice-Thomas-HJC-Letter-2.pdf
"Law-related organizations" is probably not the most apt description of this group.

They are:
African American Ministers In Action
Alliance for Justice
American Atheists
American Constitution Society
American Federation of Teachers
Blue Wave Postcard Movement
Broward for Progress
Clean Elections Texas
CommonDefense.us
Demand Justice
Demand Progress
Democracy 21
Demos
End Citizens United / Let America Vote Action Fund
Equality California
Faiths for Safe Water
Indivisible
MoveOn Civil Action
National Council of Jewish Women
NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice
Open The Government
People For the American Way
People's Parity Project
Public Citizen
Reproaction
Secure Elections Network
Silver State Equality-Nevada
Stand Up America
Take Back the Court Action Fund
URGE: Unite for Reproductive & Gender Equity
Venice Resistance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I know he wouldn't ultimately be convicted. But it would keep the conflicts of interest and January 6th continually in the public eye. January 6th was the lowest point in American democracy since the Civil War and Trump wanted to turn the US into an autocratic dictatorship and a substantial number of members of Congress wanted to help him do it.
And the loonies have spent the last 18 months trying to purge the Republican party of those remaining members who DID do the right thing.

So here's the thing. You're basically suggesting using constitutional processes and the power of the government to further a political party's agenda. That is exactly what was happening in the prior administration. Let's just stop doing that. All of us, regardless of party.

So the Ds should just look the other way? Disregard corruption because it might benefit them?

Ridiculous given how the Rs have actually abused their powers for their own benefit and to support illegal behavior.

I'm not suggesting that nothing be done. I'm supportive of the 1/6 commission, and any prosecutions that result. I'm also supportive of everybody talking about it publicly, etc. What I am not in favor of doing is impeaching a justice "for show" and to create spectacle.

I agree. No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached. Another lost impeachment hearing will cost Democrats in the long run. Shame him into retirement or charge his wife criminally or both. Keep her conspiracy to overthrow our government in the news.

Maybe Mrs. Thomas runs into some issues, though I don’t know how you sanction her for using her right to speak freely. But the notion that Justice Thomas must resign underscores the Democrat plot against America. You can’t hand Biden an illegitimate chance to fill another SCOTUS seat. People forget that Justice Thomas did nothing wrong.

If somehow Justice Thomas is forced out or driven to death, his seat needs to be held open until his party takes the Presidency. It’s only fair.

Nothing wrong? He didn't recuse himself and then was the only dissenting vote against forcing the 1/6 records to be released. That’s blatant corruption. Republicans are corrupt and your comment shows that you think that is ok. The only plot against America is the GQP and it’s very well documented beyond random internet accusations. Unlike whatever you claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I know he wouldn't ultimately be convicted. But it would keep the conflicts of interest and January 6th continually in the public eye. January 6th was the lowest point in American democracy since the Civil War and Trump wanted to turn the US into an autocratic dictatorship and a substantial number of members of Congress wanted to help him do it.
And the loonies have spent the last 18 months trying to purge the Republican party of those remaining members who DID do the right thing.

So here's the thing. You're basically suggesting using constitutional processes and the power of the government to further a political party's agenda. That is exactly what was happening in the prior administration. Let's just stop doing that. All of us, regardless of party.

So the Ds should just look the other way? Disregard corruption because it might benefit them?

Ridiculous given how the Rs have actually abused their powers for their own benefit and to support illegal behavior.

I'm not suggesting that nothing be done. I'm supportive of the 1/6 commission, and any prosecutions that result. I'm also supportive of everybody talking about it publicly, etc. What I am not in favor of doing is impeaching a justice "for show" and to create spectacle.

I agree. No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached. Another lost impeachment hearing will cost Democrats in the long run. Shame him into retirement or charge his wife criminally or both. Keep her conspiracy to overthrow our government in the news.

Maybe Mrs. Thomas runs into some issues, though I don’t know how you sanction her for using her right to speak freely. But the notion that Justice Thomas must resign underscores the Democrat plot against America. You can’t hand Biden an illegitimate chance to fill another SCOTUS seat. People forget that Justice Thomas did nothing wrong.

If somehow Justice Thomas is forced out or driven to death, his seat needs to be held open until his party takes the Presidency. It’s only fair.

Nothing wrong? He didn't recuse himself and then was the only dissenting vote against forcing the 1/6 records to be released. That’s blatant corruption. Republicans are corrupt and your comment shows that you think that is ok. The only plot against America is the GQP and it’s very well documented beyond random internet accusations. Unlike whatever you claim.

Let's assume that Justice Thomas fervently wanted Trump to serve a second term. And Let's assume that he surrounded himself with friends and family that feel the exact same way.
Are you saying he should have recused on that basis? Wouldn't that mean that every justice would need to recuse themselves when they have personal views on anything?

[Anonymous]

The Washington Post Editorial Board says yes to the question posed by this thread title.

[Anonymous]

No. No one is saying that.
They are saying he had a conflict of interest and chose to shield his wife at the expense of protecting democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I know he wouldn't ultimately be convicted. But it would keep the conflicts of interest and January 6th continually in the public eye. January 6th was the lowest point in American democracy since the Civil War and Trump wanted to turn the US into an autocratic dictatorship and a substantial number of members of Congress wanted to help him do it.
And the loonies have spent the last 18 months trying to purge the Republican party of those remaining members who DID do the right thing.

So here's the thing. You're basically suggesting using constitutional processes and the power of the government to further a political party's agenda. That is exactly what was happening in the prior administration. Let's just stop doing that. All of us, regardless of party.

So the Ds should just look the other way? Disregard corruption because it might benefit them?

Ridiculous given how the Rs have actually abused their powers for their own benefit and to support illegal behavior.

I'm not suggesting that nothing be done. I'm supportive of the 1/6 commission, and any prosecutions that result. I'm also supportive of everybody talking about it publicly, etc. What I am not in favor of doing is impeaching a justice "for show" and to create spectacle.

I agree. No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached. Another lost impeachment hearing will cost Democrats in the long run. Shame him into retirement or charge his wife criminally or both. Keep her conspiracy to overthrow our government in the news.

I agree they should be absolutely shamed but they have none. So I’m ok with him being removed. But I am a former Senate employee who was working 1/6 and think all involved are absolute garbage.

[Anonymous]

Some background on Ginni Thomas’s activities over the past two years. Really interesting thread.

[Anonymous]

I think it is a mistake to lump all of the efforts to litigate the election results in November and December with the insurrection on 1/6. One was a legitimate (though dumb and misguided) use of our system and the other was illegal anti-democratic action.

As far as I can tell, most of the texts were from November, urging challenges through litigation. None were in the days immediately surrounding 1/6. One was several days later expressing disappointment with Pence. (Let me know if I'm missing something.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yes, I know he wouldn't ultimately be convicted. But it would keep the conflicts of interest and January 6th continually in the public eye. January 6th was the lowest point in American democracy since the Civil War and Trump wanted to turn the US into an autocratic dictatorship and a substantial number of members of Congress wanted to help him do it.
And the loonies have spent the last 18 months trying to purge the Republican party of those remaining members who DID do the right thing.

So here's the thing. You're basically suggesting using constitutional processes and the power of the government to further a political party's agenda. That is exactly what was happening in the prior administration. Let's just stop doing that. All of us, regardless of party.

So the Ds should just look the other way? Disregard corruption because it might benefit them?

Ridiculous given how the Rs have actually abused their powers for their own benefit and to support illegal behavior.

I'm not suggesting that nothing be done. I'm supportive of the 1/6 commission, and any prosecutions that result. I'm also supportive of everybody talking about it publicly, etc. What I am not in favor of doing is impeaching a justice "for show" and to create spectacle.

I agree. No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached. Another lost impeachment hearing will cost Democrats in the long run. Shame him into retirement or charge his wife criminally or both. Keep her conspiracy to overthrow our government in the news.

I agree they should be absolutely shamed but they have none. So I’m ok with him being removed. But I am a former Senate employee who was working 1/6 and think all involved are absolute garbage.

100% agree with you that anybody who stormed the capitol is garbage.

I'm curious how you define "involved" though. To me, it doesn't expand to include anyone who wanted Trump to serve another term and who litigated to advance that view. (I mean , I have some choice words for these people too. But it is of a kind different.)

How do you see Justice Thomas as being "involved"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it is a mistake to lump all of the efforts to litigate the election results in November and December with the insurrection on 1/6. One was a legitimate (though dumb and misguided) use of our system and the other was illegal anti-democratic action.

As far as I can tell, most of the texts were from November, urging challenges through litigation. None were in the days immediately surrounding 1/6. One was several days later expressing disappointment with Pence. (Let me know if I'm missing something.)

Or where they two talons on the same claw?

I hope I will be able to find out in my lifetime.