Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?

[Anonymous]

Not disclosing Koch money on financial forms seems kind of crimey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ouch.

That doesn’t reflect anything other than the misogyny and double standards of society, but especially of the right wing. I sincerely doubt that Clarence Thomas is any less crazy than Ginni Thomas, but for some reason only she comes in for being called an extremist.

Ginni Thomas used to be connected with a cult called Lifespring. She admitted it herself in the 90s and was counseled by the Cult Awareness Network on leaving the cult. She probably is naturally drawn to certain charismatic and fervent organizations. I really don't think this is misogyny.

+1 It’s OK to call someone an extremist who is ranting that the Biden Crime Family is in prison for ballot fraud at GITMO.

And I’m saying I think Clarence is as crazy as Ginni.

I don’t know CT but I know former clerks. They all report he is a really nice guy and easy to be around, so it doesn’t surprise me that he is better viewed in the conservative community. I think his jurisprudence is bad and he has some real underlying psychological damage, but I don’t think he’s as loony tunes as his wife. I also suspect he was treated awfully at YLS and at least some of his issues stem from that. He’s a complicated case study of a man. She’s just loony tunes and unpleasant.

I guess they didn’t mind the pubic hair?

They can’t get enough Long Dong Silver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Daily is all about this today. It's a good listen.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/30/podcasts/the-daily/ginni-thomas-clarence-thomas.html

This was a good listen. Thanks for sharing.

+1 I didn't realize that Ginni Thomas was such a welcome and common presence in the White House and the Oval Office. After hearing that and knowing her symbiotic relationship with her husband, Justice Thomas definitely needs to recuse.

He left the option to recuse in the mirror. He needs to resign.

That would require ethics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

He never will. Republicans do not want to set a standard where a judge would have to recuse themselves. If that happens all the “conservative” judge could never hear cases. It’s simple you can not fix the result and recuse yourself.

[Anonymous]

Of course CT won’t retire. He’s an amoral POS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Daily is all about this today. It's a good listen.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/30/podcasts/the-daily/ginni-thomas-clarence-thomas.html

This was a good listen. Thanks for sharing.

+1 I didn't realize that Ginni Thomas was such a welcome and common presence in the White House and the Oval Office. After hearing that and knowing her symbiotic relationship with her husband, Justice Thomas definitely needs to recuse.

He left the option to recuse in the mirror. He needs to resign.

That would require ethics.

And it's obvious no ethics are being required here, except by the Democrats. Anyone else would cite health reasons and retire quietly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

Hang on, you think that the mere fact that his wife was paid by Heritage is enough to mean he should have recused from cases? Failure to disclose is a problem, for sure. But think about what that would mean. Many justices have spouses who gain income from law firms who represent clients with interests before the court. Should they all recuse? What if somebody's spouse received money to speak at an ACLU event? A Planned Parenthood event? Recusal required?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

Hang on, you think that the mere fact that his wife was paid by Heritage is enough to mean he should have recused from cases? Failure to disclose is a problem, for sure. But think about what that would mean. Many justices have spouses who gain income from law firms who represent clients with interests before the court. Should they all recuse? What if somebody's spouse received money to speak at an ACLU event? A Planned Parenthood event? Recusal required?

When I have to do DoD financial disclosure, I don’t get an option to not disclose my spouse’s earnings and to be question about it. If I fail to disclose, I lose my job and can be prosecuted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

Hang on, you think that the mere fact that his wife was paid by Heritage is enough to mean he should have recused from cases? Failure to disclose is a problem, for sure. But think about what that would mean. Many justices have spouses who gain income from law firms who represent clients with interests before the court. Should they all recuse? What if somebody's spouse received money to speak at an ACLU event? A Planned Parenthood event? Recusal required?

When I have to do DoD financial disclosure, I don’t get an option to not disclose my spouse’s earnings and to be question about it. If I fail to disclose, I lose my job and can be prosecuted.

I can't even own grocery store or Walmart (has drug store) stock because my dh works for freaking FDA and he has to fill out financial disclosure forms or be fired. He has seen a coworker led out by authorities in handcuffs for illegal stock trading.

In the meantime the spouse of a supreme court judge is doing what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

Hang on, you think that the mere fact that his wife was paid by Heritage is enough to mean he should have recused from cases? Failure to disclose is a problem, for sure. But think about what that would mean. Many justices have spouses who gain income from law firms who represent clients with interests before the court. Should they all recuse? What if somebody's spouse received money to speak at an ACLU event? A Planned Parenthood event? Recusal required?

When I have to do DoD financial disclosure, I don’t get an option to not disclose my spouse’s earnings and to be question about it. If I fail to disclose, I lose my job and can be prosecuted.

I know that. And I said that failure to disclose is a problem. I read PP as saying that just "taking money" was a problem. I do not see that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

Hang on, you think that the mere fact that his wife was paid by Heritage is enough to mean he should have recused from cases? Failure to disclose is a problem, for sure. But think about what that would mean. Many justices have spouses who gain income from law firms who represent clients with interests before the court. Should they all recuse? What if somebody's spouse received money to speak at an ACLU event? A Planned Parenthood event? Recusal required?

DP. John Roberts’ wife was a very talented lawyer with a big firm who became a legal headhunter instead once Roberts was confirmed for SCOTUS, to avoid any possibility of conflict. There’s no telling how many cases that Thomas has decided where one of the parties, or one of the interest groups writing amicus briefs on behalf of the parties, was someone who’s paying Ginni Thomas. She’s been in every right wing thing everywhere forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

Hang on, you think that the mere fact that his wife was paid by Heritage is enough to mean he should have recused from cases? Failure to disclose is a problem, for sure. But think about what that would mean. Many justices have spouses who gain income from law firms who represent clients with interests before the court. Should they all recuse? What if somebody's spouse received money to speak at an ACLU event? A Planned Parenthood event? Recusal required?

DP. John Roberts’ wife was a very talented lawyer with a big firm who became a legal headhunter instead once Roberts was confirmed for SCOTUS, to avoid any possibility of conflict. There’s no telling how many cases that Thomas has decided where one of the parties, or one of the interest groups writing amicus briefs on behalf of the parties, was someone who’s paying Ginni Thomas. She’s been in every right wing thing everywhere forever.

Genuinely curious here- so the idea is that a spouse accepting money from a group that advocates for certain policy outcomes (though not a party to the case or themselves directly impacted by the case) requires recusal? Regardless of whether the reason for the payment was (facially) about that issue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gather going after Virginia Thomas is the left's new means of trying to create another Supreme Court vacancy. It's all so transparent.

Surprise, surprise. AOC now calling for Clarence Thomas to either resign or be impeached: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/600145-ocasio-cortez-to-clarence-thomas-resign-or-face-impeachment

Who could have seen that coming? Oh, wait, me. I did. Doubt all you want haters.

Other Democrats, the ones who are actually in charge of things, want him to recuse.

I’m neither an elected official nor in charge of anything. He needs to resign. Taking money from the Heritage Foundation (let’s not try to be precious and pretend that they keep their money totally separate)? Do you know how many cases he should have recused from? Should recuse from going forward? He needs to resign. Not like Roberts gets what a partisan joke he presides over.

Hang on, you think that the mere fact that his wife was paid by Heritage is enough to mean he should have recused from cases? Failure to disclose is a problem, for sure. But think about what that would mean. Many justices have spouses who gain income from law firms who represent clients with interests before the court. Should they all recuse? What if somebody's spouse received money to speak at an ACLU event? A Planned Parenthood event? Recusal required?

Yes, they should.

I serve on a DC board and recuse where there is anything close to an appearance of impropriety, Certainly a SCOTUS judge should at least do that much.