Should Clarence Thomas be IMPEACHED because of Ginni Thomas's 1/6 participation?

[d0gbreath]

I'm not responsible for my significant other. Neither is he.

 

[Felis Leo]

I know what patriotic Americans would choose in this poll.

MSN

View attachment 67380267

"Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone vote to block the House Select Committee from getting January 6th documents from Donald Trump," Bookbinder wrote. "We know now that his wife participated in the Jan. 6 rally. That creates a clear appearance of bias and a possible major conflict of interest."


The popular politics podcast "No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen" weighed in on its official Twitter account, writing: "Clarence Thomas needs to be investigated immediately."


"If you are a Supreme Court Justice whose wife attended a rally that resulted in the January 6th Capitol attack, you should do the right thing and recuse yourself from voting on the Capitol attack cases," Stern wrote.

No. Simply being married to a foolish loud-mouth is not a high crime or misdemeanor.

"I don't like your horrible wife/husband" should not be the standard of dishonorably stripping people of public office without further evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the officer.

 

[Lutherf]

Now, you're being silly. It's known that the wife of a Supreme Court Justice was at the Ellipse on 1/6/21. That's the problem! If Jill Biden was in that group of people throwing eggs at DJT, that too is a problem. The wife of a Senator, VP or president not only present but possibly involved with an egg throwing incident at DJT. An investigation should move forward in either case be it Ginni Thomas or Jill Biden.

It's because she's white, isn't it? I mean, if she was black and protesting then we don't mess around with that stuff but white chicks that protest are valid targets for whatever the cops feel is good for conversation at the time.

 

[Luce]

No.

Nobody should be impeached for the actions of another.

 

[Kreton]

He and the other sexual predator on the SC should be impeached for being sexual predators not for his wife's attendance.

 

[DarkWizard12]

We have a replacement....

you really want to be known as the party that impeached the only black justice because he didn't get agree with you? Weird flex but okay.

The proposition is an interesting thought, not without some complexity.

the proposition is *idiocy, democrats would lose all legitimacy if they did such a thing....which is why i kinda want to see them do it lol

 

[JMR]

But everyone knows what they are trying to do... Remember what Biden did to him in his confirmation hearing? Nasty.

Remember what Thomas did to Anita Hill? Now that was nasty.

 

[JMR]

It's a stupid idea. The little lady can't have an opinion now? Wtf?

I think Thomas is partisan in his decisions, but he is what he is, and his wife having like opinions isn't that surprising. Thousands of people went to that rally and there is nothing wrong with it. I can't believe anyone is even suggesting this!

I don't suggest impeaching Thomas at all.

However, I do support looking into what part in organizing the rally Ginny might have had. That is more than having an opinion.
Many of her "clients" fund events that might be questionable.

I think Thomas should recuse himself from any case that his wife has an interest in, but the only thing holding him to that is his own sense of ethics, and, um....yeah.

 

[MaryP]

I don't suggest impeaching Thomas at all.

However, I do support looking into what part in organizing the rally Ginny might have had. That is more than having an opinion.
Many of her "clients" fund events that might be questionable.

I think Thomas should recuse himself from any case that his wife has an interest in, but the only thing holding him to that is his own sense of ethics, and, um....yeah.

I'll ask again, what cases involving Jan 6 are before the Court? If you know.

 

[JMR]

I'll ask again, what cases involving Jan 6 are before the Court? If you know.

There have been cases involving clients of Ginny Thomas before the court in previous years. He did not recuse himself.
She runs a business promising clients access to top level officials. I think its worth a look.

As far as Jan 6th, some of those papers Thomas wanted to protect might prove interesting.

 

[MaryP]

Didn't say that she did. What I have supported is an investigation into the two to either clear them or do what's needed based on any findings. What's bad is Thomas making a decision on anything 1/6 related. Thus, he should recuse himself from those cases. That's my yes, recuse'd' vote in my poll.


Nope, but that also doesn't mean that some there hasn't been found to be involved either. That's what investigations are for.

Think of it this way. If at a DJT rally, Jill Biden was with a group of people who started throwing eggs at DJT on stage - some hitting him, but witnesses stated that she never threw one egg. OK, she's in the clear so far. But, if an investigation into the incident was conducted and it was found that Jill Biden planned and instructed that group to throw eggs at DJT, should she share some responsibility for what took place? Until investigations are conducted, we only have what each person believes.

Don't you trust the Jan 6 Committee to do that if they get an inkling she was in on it?

 

[post]

I'll ask again, what cases involving Jan 6 are before the Court? If you know.

It isn't even a close call, considering the longstanding pattern of behavior vs. "even the appearance..." but SCOTUS has no rule and
it falls to the House to decide when enough is enough.

The Case for Impeaching Clarence Thomas

The Supreme Court justice refuses to recuse himself from cases in which his right-wing activist wife, Ginni, has a clear interest. The Democrats should punish him for it.

newrepublic.com

Michael Tomasky/January 24, 2022
"In a sane world, Jane Mayer’s excellent piece on Ginni Thomas in The New Yorker would set off a series of events that would lead to her husband Clarence Thomas’s impeachment and removal from the Supreme Court. Ginni is involved with numerous far-right organizations and schemes that take very public positions on court decisions across a range of social and political issues, such as last week’s 8–1 holding that Donald Trump could not block the release of documents related to the January 6, 2021, insurrection.

Thomas was the lone dissenter in that case. His wife sat on the advisory board of a group that sent busloads of insurrectionists to Washington on January 6. In addition, she cheered the insurrection on Facebook. It’s just the most recent example where she has been involved in activities that directly or indirectly place her activism before the court, and her husband does not care how corrupt it looks.
They’ve been doing this for years. This first occasion was back in 2000, in a case Mayer doesn’t even go into, when it was revealed after that election that as a Heritage Foundation staffer, Ginni was screening résumés for the incoming Bush administration while the nation awaited a ruling from the court on the Florida recount. There was pressure then on Thomas to recuse himself.

A decade later, when the first major Obamacare case came before the court, it was widely noted that Ginni’s group, Liberty Central, called the law a “disaster” and urged repeal. Again, there were calls for Thomas to recuse.
He didn’t do so in either case. And in the first one, he was part of the 5–4 majority in Bush v. Gore, one of the most self-discrediting decisions in the court’s history...."

Upon request, I will share full text of either of the following articles,

131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where ...​

https://www.wsj.com › articles › 131-federal-judges-broke...
Sep 28, 2021 — More than 130 federal judges have violated U.S. law and judicial ethics by ... require judges to avoid even the appearance of a conflict.

• "..About two-thirds of federal district judges disclosed holdings of individual stocks, and nearly one of every five who did heard at least one case involving those stocks.
  Alerted to the violations by the Journal, 56 of the judges have directed court clerks to notify parties in 329 lawsuits that they should have recused themselves. That means new judges might be assigned, potentially upending rulings.
• ...The hundreds of recusal violations found by the Journal breach a bedrock principle of American jurisprudence: No one should be a judge of his or her own cause. Congress first laid out that principle in 1792 to guarantee litigants an impartial judge and reassure the public that courts could be trusted.."
  

  Dozens of Federal Judges Had Financial Conflicts - Wall ...​

  https://www.wsj.com › articles › dozens-of-federal-judges...
  Mar 1, 2022 — A Wall Street Journal investigation found that federal judges around the nation have violated U.S. law and judicial ethics by overseeing 993 ...

 

[upsideguy]

you really want to be known as the party that impeached the only black justice because he didn't get agree with you? Weird flex but okay.

the proposition is *idiocy, democrats would lose all legitimacy if they did such a thing....which is why i kinda want to see them do it lol

The proposition is interesting, not without complexity. He would not be the only black justice, there is a replacement.

Its not going to happen, because of the complexity. That does not mean it lacks merit, just political expediency. It is interesting because Thomas failed to recuse himself, while his own wife, thorough associations that she has not renounced, as ostensibly advocated the overthrow of the Constitution, which Thomas has sworn to protect. It does put him in a position that his judgement (as well as that of his wife, seems like "out there" pillow talk) is of question, which would be grounds for impeachment.

Calmes: Has Clarence Thomas' wife crossed a line? Yes, and then some

One of the nation's top authorities on judicial ethics calls the conduct of Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, 'reprehensible.'

www.latimes.com

The Long Crusade of Clarence and Ginni Thomas (Published 2022)

The Supreme Court justice and his wife battled for years for a more conservative America. New reporting shows how far she was willing to go after Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Hamish Howl]

Why would we impeach something for what someone else did?

 

[DarkWizard12]

The proposition is interesting, not without complexity. He would not be the only black justice, there is a replacement.

he is currently the only black justice on the court. You are impeaching the only black justice on the court, for not agreeing with you, to replace them with a black justice who will agree, while claiming to be the anti-racist party.

Its not going to happen, because of the complexity. That does not mean it lacks merit, just political expediency.

it lacks both. It's an idea that hurts democrats on its merit. Whether it's expedient is not an argument.

It is interesting because Thomas failed to recuse himself, while his own wife, thorough associations that she has not renounced, as ostensibly advocated the overthrow of the Constitution, which Thomas has sworn to protect.

this is just being silly.

It does put him in a position that his judgement (as well as that of his wife, seems like "out there" pillow talk) is of question, which would be grounds for impeachment.

why, every judgement should be of question, as every judge is an employee of the state, including Judge Thomas. That's not reason to impeach a judge, unless you plan to impeach all of them lol

Calmes: Has Clarence Thomas' wife crossed a line? Yes, and then some

One of the nation's top authorities on judicial ethics calls the conduct of Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, 'reprehensible.'

www.latimes.com

The Long Crusade of Clarence and Ginni Thomas (Published 2022)

The Supreme Court justice and his wife battled for years for a more conservative America. New reporting shows how far she was willing to go after Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss.

www.nytimes.com

yes, when i think of trustworthy news, without bias or opinion, i think of the New York times.

 

[post]

Why would we impeach something for what someone else did?

Uhhhh.... because it shitstained the deciding vote as to who the next POTUS would be, as a direct consequence of that SCOTUS ruling?

CONTESTING THE VOTE: CHALLENGING A JUSTICE; Job of Thomas's Wife Raises Conflict-of-Interest Questions (Published 2000)

Virginia Lamp Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, discloses she is working for conservative research group Heritage Foundation gathering resumes for appointments in possible Bush administration, but that she sees no conflict with husband's deliberations on case involving...

www.nytimes.com

CONTESTING THE VOTE: CHALLENGING A JUSTICE; Job of Thomas's Wife Raises Conflict-of-Interest Questions​

• By Christopher Marquis

• Dec. 12, 2000
• "Editors' Note Appended
  
  The wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said today that she was working at a conservative research group gathering resumes for appointments in a possible Bush administration but that she saw no conflict between her job and her husband's deliberations on a case that could decide the presidency.
  
  The comments from the justice's wife, Virginia Lamp Thomas, a former Republican Congressional aide, came as a federal judge in Nashville said Justice Thomas faced a serious conflict of interest as a result of his wife's work for the Heritage Foundation.
  The foundation has close ties to the Republican Party and would probably have a say in the hiring of key government officials if Gov. George W. Bush assumed the presidency. In e-mail distributed on Capitol Hill earlier this month, Mrs. Thomas solicited resumes ''for transition purposes'' from the government oversight committees of Congress.
  
  A decision by Justice Thomas to recuse himself could alter the outcome of the case now before the court, which is weighing whether to allow a manual recount of votes in Florida. On Saturday, by a vote of 5 to 4, the court blocked the recount for now. Justice Thomas, who was appointed to the court by President George Bush, Governor Bush's father, was in the majority..."
  

 

[post]

he is currently the only black justice on the court. You are impeaching the only black justice on the court, for not agreeing with you, to replace them with a black justice who will agree, while claiming to be the anti-racist party.

it lacks both. It's an idea that hurts democrats on its merit. Whether it's expedient is not an argument.

this is just being silly.

why, every judgement should be of question, as every judge is an employee of the state, including Judge Thomas. That's not reason to impeach a judge, unless you plan to impeach all of them lol

yes, when i think of trustworthy news, without bias or opinion, i think of the New York times.

What do you think of, washingtonexaminer, breitbart, dailycaller, justthenews ....?

Washington Examiner - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Washington Examiner is an American conservative news website and weekly magazine based in Washington, D.C. It is owned by MediaDC, a subsidiary of Clarity Media Group, which is owned by Philip Anschutz.[2]

Breitbart News - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The company is headquartered in Los Angeles, with bureaus in Texas, London, and Jerusalem. Co-founder Larry Solov is the co-owner (along with Andrew Breitbart's widow Susie Breitbart and the Mercer family)[22]

The Daily Caller - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In June 2020, Carlson left the site. Patel confirmed that he had bought out Carlson's stake[17] and brought in Omeed Malik, a Muslim American Democrat, as a new partner.[18] The Daily Caller became a minority-owned and -run company thereafter.[19]
...
2Ties to white supremacists

Bank of America Executive Departs After Misconduct Claim (Published 2018)

The executive, Omeed Malik, was accused of inappropriate sexual conduct with a young woman, according to people briefed on the bank’s investigation.

www.nytimes.com

"A senior executive at Bank of America in New York departed last week after an internal investigation into a young female banker’s accusation of inappropriate sexual conduct, according to people at the bank who were briefed on the investigation.

The executive, Omeed Malik, 38, was a powerful figure in the hedge fund world. He was a managing director and helped run the prime brokerage business that raises money for hedge funds..."

John Solomon (political commentator) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fox News
In October 2019, it was reported that Solomon was joining Fox News as an opinion contributor.[42]

An internal Fox News research briefing book warned that "John Solomon played an indispensable role in the collection and domestic publication" of parts of the Trump-Ukraine "disinformation campaign," The Daily Beast reported in February 2020.[43]

Solomon was no longer associated with the network by late 2020.

Just The News​

In January 2020, Solomon launched Just The News, a news media outlet and website.[44] He hosts a podcast, John Solomon Reports, on the website.[45][46]

 

[MaryP]

He should buy her a dress instead of making her use a tablecloth and a Simplicity pattern.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I know what patriotic Americans would choose in this poll.

MSN

View attachment 67380267

"Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone vote to block the House Select Committee from getting January 6th documents from Donald Trump," Bookbinder wrote. "We know now that his wife participated in the Jan. 6 rally. That creates a clear appearance of bias and a possible major conflict of interest."


The popular politics podcast "No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen" weighed in on its official Twitter account, writing: "Clarence Thomas needs to be investigated immediately."


"If you are a Supreme Court Justice whose wife attended a rally that resulted in the January 6th Capitol attack, you should do the right thing and recuse yourself from voting on the Capitol attack cases," Stern wrote.

Abe Fortas on steroids

 

[DarkWizard12]

What do you think of, washingtonexaminer, breitbart, dailycaller, justthenews ....?

washington examiner, i don't know enough about. I don't use them that much, but i also have little against them.

Breitbart, is its own bag of beans. I trust them far more with foreign matters than domestic, and even will push an agenda, and admit to doing so. personally though, i haven't read them in ever, and i've never brought up breitbart in this forum, although generally because leftists here, who are the majority, wouldn't even bother reading it. So what's the point?

The dailycaller is decent, but with the reverse problem, i wouldn't trust them in foreign matters at all.

justthenews is just clickbait and wishful thinking. They have a few good articles every now and then, but in the short time i followed them, they were only driving up engagement.

generally, i look at foreign news sources, or RCP, about *A* story that just happened, and THEN I'll look at the dailycaller/Business Insider, Liberty Mag, etc. to see what their take is. I don't always agree with their takes, but I don't feel insulted when i read them, so i place them higher than most leftists mags.

 

[yankintx]

I know what patriotic Americans would choose in this poll.

MSN

View attachment 67380267

"Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone vote to block the House Select Committee from getting January 6th documents from Donald Trump," Bookbinder wrote. "We know now that his wife participated in the Jan. 6 rally. That creates a clear appearance of bias and a possible major conflict of interest."


The popular politics podcast "No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen" weighed in on its official Twitter account, writing: "Clarence Thomas needs to be investigated immediately."


"If you are a Supreme Court Justice whose wife attended a rally that resulted in the January 6th Capitol attack, you should do the right thing and recuse yourself from voting on the Capitol attack cases," Stern wrote.

The woman was protesting peacefully, exercising her Right. Like most protesters she did not take part in the insurrection attempt. Her husband was not there.

I don't see the issue here

 

[post]

The woman was protesting peacefully, exercising her Right. Like most protesters she did not take part in the insurrection attempt. Her husband was not there.

I don't see the issue here

LOL !
A long history, at least 21 years results in a pattern of impropriety. The court deserves better, but Justice Thomas and the 86 percent white
G.O.P. he has provided cover for, and in their own heads, absolution of, don't put the reputation of the court above their own interests, ever!

 

[Logician Man]

It's because she's white, isn't it? I mean, if she was black and protesting then we don't mess around with that stuff but white chicks that protest are valid targets for whatever the cops feel is good for conversation at the time.

You won the race to play the race card. Congrats on that 'accomplishment.'

 

[yankintx]

LOL !

I draw my conclusion from the facts as they present them self. I know Thomas was the lone dissenting vote, i need more than that for impeachment.

If that evidence presents its self than yes possible grounds for impeachment, but i need more.

 

[GummyVitamins]

The FBI is already looking into Ginni Thomas?

If they had any credible reason to investigate her they would be. Why do you care so much?

She didn't throw the egg. Wouldn't we be looking at a criminal investigation into eggs thrown at DJT if that actually took place?

There are criminal investigations based on all the evidence and video of the riot. Everyone was on video. Their pictures were shared publicly. So far, I'm not aware of her being involved in criminal behavior. You just want her investigated because you don't like her. Everything about your "logic" in this thread is petty ignorance.

As well you don't understand using an example. News flash. Jill Biden wasn't actually with any group of people actually throwing eggs at DJT.

How can you be sure? Why aren't you calling for a Congressional investigation to clear her name? Perhaps we need the FBI to harass her and give them evidence that she has never thrown an egg at someone before. Why does the stupidity of your logic end at being butthurt at Thomas's wife? It's your stupid comparison, why not hold them to the same standard?