Anonymous
02/22/2022 22:12
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
This was an excellent and very long article. One of the reporters has three Pulitzers. 90% of you won't bother to read it but it's chilling how many irons she has in the RWNJ fire. She sure is caught up in anti choice zealotry for someone who never bothered to have kids.
Clarence needs to retire. He's corrupt and should have recused himself numerous times. He was allowed to revise years old sworn financal statements to reflect $700k in income from organizations with business before the Supreme Court. If The Court wants to regain the faith of the American people they should clean themselves up.
Anonymous
02/22/2022 18:37
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
If we’ve learned nothing from the Trump era, it’s that ethics rules shouldn’t be voluntary. We shouldn’t be dependent on the morality of public office holders to disclose these issues because we have people like Trump and Thomas holding those offices who don’t feel they are subject to these rules.
+1
We learned from the GOP in the Trumpen years how many thing we sort of assumed were rules or laws were just custom, and custom easily discarded by those without scruples.
+1
Hold them accountable.
If that empty skull John Roberts actually cared about how his name will go down in history, he’d get his court under control. Three illegitimate justices, plus the ethically challenged Thomas? Bad news.
He should be deeply embarrassed. He has three Trump stooges.
He seems to have an edge of panic; I think he’s fully aware of the legacy he’ll leave.
Anonymous
02/22/2022 15:45
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
If we’ve learned nothing from the Trump era, it’s that ethics rules shouldn’t be voluntary. We shouldn’t be dependent on the morality of public office holders to disclose these issues because we have people like Trump and Thomas holding those offices who don’t feel they are subject to these rules.
+1
We learned from the GOP in the Trumpen years how many thing we sort of assumed were rules or laws were just custom, and custom easily discarded by those without scruples.
+1
Hold them accountable.
If that empty skull John Roberts actually cared about how his name will go down in history, he’d get his court under control. Three illegitimate justices, plus the ethically challenged Thomas? Bad news.
He should be deeply embarrassed. He has three Trump stooges.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
02/10/2022 21:52
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
If we’ve learned nothing from the Trump era, it’s that ethics rules shouldn’t be voluntary. We shouldn’t be dependent on the morality of public office holders to disclose these issues because we have people like Trump and Thomas holding those offices who don’t feel they are subject to these rules.
+1
We learned from the GOP in the Trumpen years how many thing we sort of assumed were rules or laws were just custom, and custom easily discarded by those without scruples.
+1
Hold them accountable.
If that empty skull John Roberts actually cared about how his name will go down in history, he’d get his court under control. Three illegitimate justices, plus the ethically challenged Thomas? Bad news.
Anonymous
02/10/2022 07:09
Subject: Re:Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:More publications are jumping on the story. Thomas needs to retire.
"Clarence and Ginni Thomas, the Supreme Court’s Unethical “It” Couple
-How the Thomases have been able to get away with their decades long abuse of influence."
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/ginni-clarence-thomas/
He really needs to go. He and his equally ethically challenged wife can go profit enormously somewhere else.
Anonymous
02/09/2022 23:42
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
If we’ve learned nothing from the Trump era, it’s that ethics rules shouldn’t be voluntary. We shouldn’t be dependent on the morality of public office holders to disclose these issues because we have people like Trump and Thomas holding those offices who don’t feel they are subject to these rules.
+1
We learned from the GOP in the Trumpen years how many thing we sort of assumed were rules or laws were just custom, and custom easily discarded by those without scruples.
+1
Hold them accountable.
Anonymous
02/09/2022 23:41
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:The GOP justices look worse with each passing revelation.
+1
Amoral POSs. All of them.
Anonymous
02/09/2022 23:31
Subject: Re:Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
More publications are jumping on the story. Thomas needs to retire.
"Clarence and Ginni Thomas, the Supreme Court’s Unethical “It” Couple
-How the Thomases have been able to get away with their decades long abuse of influence."
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/ginni-clarence-thomas/
"Clarence and Ginni Thomas, the Supreme Court’s Unethical “It” Couple
-How the Thomases have been able to get away with their decades long abuse of influence."
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/ginni-clarence-thomas/
Anonymous
02/07/2022 07:25
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
The GOP justices look worse with each passing revelation.
Anonymous
02/06/2022 22:05
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
There's no reason DeSantis should be in weekly contact with Justice Thomas. Time for Thomas to retire.
Anonymous
02/05/2022 11:13
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
If we’ve learned nothing from the Trump era, it’s that ethics rules shouldn’t be voluntary. We shouldn’t be dependent on the morality of public office holders to disclose these issues because we have people like Trump and Thomas holding those offices who don’t feel they are subject to these rules.
+1
We learned from the GOP in the Trumpen years how many thing we sort of assumed were rules or laws were just custom, and custom easily discarded by those without scruples.
Anonymous
02/05/2022 04:47
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
If we’ve learned nothing from the Trump era, it’s that ethics rules shouldn’t be voluntary. We shouldn’t be dependent on the morality of public office holders to disclose these issues because we have people like Trump and Thomas holding those offices who don’t feel they are subject to these rules.
Anonymous
02/04/2022 22:03
Subject: Is Ginni Thomas A Threat To The Supreme Court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Judicial Watch is funding Ginni Thomas and submitted this amicus brief regarding the affirmative action case currently before SCOTUS. But Clarence Thomas would rather die than appropriately recuse himself from something.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/173494/20210331132404544_210127a%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20efiling.pdf
Yes. We knew this from the well researched New Yorker article. Justice Thomas has benefitted in excess of $650k over the last few years from Ginni's work for anti affirmative action groups and he failed to list the income on his financial statements. This clearly suggests guilty knowledge. At the very least he needs to recuse from all cases his wife has an interest in.
There's no reason DeSantis should be in weekly contact with Justice Thomas. Time for Thomas to retire.
[/twitter]https://twitter.com/JaneMayerNYer/status/1489650866772754436[twitter]