Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

“Traitor” is another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He is responsible for his actions. We don’t know everything he did behind closed doors but we do know he hasn’t recused himself when appropriate and he also failed to disclose his spouse’s large income from these orgs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

+1

Clearly Roberts isn’t interested in a clean court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.

What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.

What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.

All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.

What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.

All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.

Disgusting that Roberts and the GOP have destroyed the SCOTUS.

[Anonymous]

There is no conflict with the activities of his wife unless she is a party to a Supreme Court case which is not likely to ever happen. I the world that we have constructed today as opposed to the one that existed in the 1950s we cannot and should not disqualify a spouse based on what the other spouse does. Both spouses work. In NY one may be an investment banker for one firm and the other for another firm. They compete. They may be on opposite sides of a deal. Or they may be traders on opposite sides of transactions. We should not be disqualifying either. In DC it is not uncommon to have spouses on opposite sides of advocacy firms on the same issues. That is fine. It has to be or women will be the one losing in the end. I see this as no different. Who cares what she advocates? Do you think for a moment CT cares? Would any spouse? I do not think so if you have a sworn duty. So I think this is all a dumb issue. I public life and in corporate life we will be seeing more and more of this ad we have to be ok with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.

What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.

All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.

Disgusting that Roberts and the GOP have destroyed the SCOTUS.

Roberts and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are the only ones holding things together. They are stuck between LFNJs and RWNJs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no conflict with the activities of his wife unless she is a party to a Supreme Court case which is not likely to ever happen. I the world that we have constructed today as opposed to the one that existed in the 1950s we cannot and should not disqualify a spouse based on what the other spouse does. Both spouses work. In NY one may be an investment banker for one firm and the other for another firm. They compete. They may be on opposite sides of a deal. Or they may be traders on opposite sides of transactions. We should not be disqualifying either. In DC it is not uncommon to have spouses on opposite sides of advocacy firms on the same issues. That is fine. It has to be or women will be the one losing in the end. I see this as no different. Who cares what she advocates? Do you think for a moment CT cares? Would any spouse? I do not think so if you have a sworn duty. So I think this is all a dumb issue. I public life and in corporate life we will be seeing more and more of this ad we have to be ok with it.

Your naïveté is adorable. Clarence Thomas can be a SC Justice. Ginni Thomas can advocate for the far RW agenda. Both are fine. What is not okay is Justice Thomas not recusing himself from cases that his wife is directly tied to. He should be recusing himself from cases where he is in the position of ruling for or against organizations from which he (via his wife’s work) has benefited financially. Neither one needs to quit their job. He just needs to safeguard his impartiality and maintain the integrity of the Court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no conflict with the activities of his wife unless she is a party to a Supreme Court case which is not likely to ever happen. I the world that we have constructed today as opposed to the one that existed in the 1950s we cannot and should not disqualify a spouse based on what the other spouse does. Both spouses work. In NY one may be an investment banker for one firm and the other for another firm. They compete. They may be on opposite sides of a deal. Or they may be traders on opposite sides of transactions. We should not be disqualifying either. In DC it is not uncommon to have spouses on opposite sides of advocacy firms on the same issues. That is fine. It has to be or women will be the one losing in the end. I see this as no different. Who cares what she advocates? Do you think for a moment CT cares? Would any spouse? I do not think so if you have a sworn duty. So I think this is all a dumb issue. I public life and in corporate life we will be seeing more and more of this ad we have to be ok with it.

Roberts’s wife disagrees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.

What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.

All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.

Disgusting that Roberts and the GOP have destroyed the SCOTUS.

Roberts and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are the only ones holding things together. They are stuck between LFNJs and RWNJs.

Nope. He's complicit. He could hold justices accountable for their corruption and lies, but he doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m sure old Dan can just make something up and report it as fact. He’s a joke.

And I sure wish you had a scintilla of integrity.

You think the man that resigned in shame has integrity? That says a lot about you.

What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.

And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?

Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?

PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.

It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.

“Special” is one word for it.

It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.

He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.

He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.

Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.

Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.

We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.

Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.

What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.

All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.

Disgusting that Roberts and the GOP have destroyed the SCOTUS.

Roberts and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are the only ones holding things together. They are stuck between LFNJs and RWNJs.

Nope. He's complicit. He could hold justices accountable for their corruption and lies, but he doesn't.

+1

Roberts is a fascist, same as the rest of the RWNJs on the court (also, other pp, what do you mean by “LFNJ”? Is this in the vein of “the right can’t meme”?). Look at what Miss Ginni is up to now (and was up to in 2020): https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/30/us/politics/republican-poll-monitors-election-activists.html These people are fascists.