Hi Valere. I am still outraged that Thomas has not only not recused himself but was obviously the 5th needed vote to prevent Smith's case moving forward until the Supreme Court rules on Trump's specious immunity claim, the earliest of which would be in May, thereby giving Trump the added time he needs to stall for time until he thinks he…
Hi Valere. I am still outraged that Thomas has not only not recused himself but was obviously the 5th needed vote to prevent Smith's case moving forward until the Supreme Court rules on Trump's specious immunity claim, the earliest of which would be in May, thereby giving Trump the added time he needs to stall for time until he thinks he'll be sworn in January.
Not only did SCOTUS do a solid for Trump on this case, but on the Colorado ballot case, as 3 justices noted, the hard-core far right extremists on the Court gratuitously went outside the bounds of judicial impartiality by gratuitously offering their opinion that Trump could not be barred under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment without a Congressional enabling statute. Legally, their opinions, referred to as "dicta", are worthless and are little less than shooting their mouths off to help Trump.
While I don't know if Ginny's complicity in the events surrounding Jan 6 rise to the level of criminal misconduct, they blatantly manifest not only the appearance of a conflict of interest for her husband, but an actual conflict of interest. He must recuse himself! If he doesn't, it is the responsibility of the Chief Justice to see that he does.
Hi L.D., Clarence Thomas is morally weak. Ginny is conniving - and I believe she offered her husband's influence to Mark Meadows and Donald Trump on January 6. She was so anxious to reach them, telling them over and over to 'press on' and 'don't give up.' She went to the January 6th committee (voluntarily after receiving their letter); and had no trouble claiming mea culpa and "I wish I had never sent the text messages." Of course.
Those messages are and were incriminating enough that Jack Smith can call for a Grand Jury investigation and let the Grand Jury decide if she warrants an indictment. Until then, Ginny and Clarence will continue to thumb their noses at us. And drive the motor home to Costco and home.
Your points are well taken, but I think I’d go further on Clarence and call him totally morally bankrupt. What’s worse, he’s arrogant and believes he’s untouchable in his lofty position. He knows that while he could be impeached, like Trump, the Republicans need him right where he is and the Senate would never come up with a two-thirds vote to convict.
I must say that I think it would be a stretch to successfully prosecute her. Also, Smith has a lot bigger fish to fry. I think he’s brilliant. It’s just a shame that Garland waited so long to appoint a Special Prosecutor. I think that he’ll be the one going down in the history books as the guy who dropped the ball. LDM
I ageee about Clarence Thomas. He was never qualified as a Supreme Court justice. The fact that he was inserted as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall is an insult to anyone who has ever worked to further social justice. it was a terrible decision then and it’s been horrific for the United States. Indeed, he is horrid and has harmed so many citizens with his pretend conservative votes. He’s a recipient of affirmative action and has taken that away. He is a minority yet he has come right out and said that he will vote to remove same-sex marriage rights (there is a bill in Hawaii now requesting a change to the constitution to offer protection for their same-sex marriage law simply because Clarence Thomas has been vocal about reversing same-sex marriage at this Supreme Court level. There is nothing concrete on which I can make this kind of suggestion or suspect his motives, but I wonder if he’s working on getting another motorhome with these votes and promises to vote as the conservative puppet masters prefer.Or he may even be angling to get his own island, like Mike Johnson gained after he became speaker with only $30,000 in his bank account. Who could have guessed the value of a ‘pay for play ‘ vote.
Hi Valere. I am still outraged that Thomas has not only not recused himself but was obviously the 5th needed vote to prevent Smith's case moving forward until the Supreme Court rules on Trump's specious immunity claim, the earliest of which would be in May, thereby giving Trump the added time he needs to stall for time until he thinks he'll be sworn in January.
Not only did SCOTUS do a solid for Trump on this case, but on the Colorado ballot case, as 3 justices noted, the hard-core far right extremists on the Court gratuitously went outside the bounds of judicial impartiality by gratuitously offering their opinion that Trump could not be barred under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment without a Congressional enabling statute. Legally, their opinions, referred to as "dicta", are worthless and are little less than shooting their mouths off to help Trump.
While I don't know if Ginny's complicity in the events surrounding Jan 6 rise to the level of criminal misconduct, they blatantly manifest not only the appearance of a conflict of interest for her husband, but an actual conflict of interest. He must recuse himself! If he doesn't, it is the responsibility of the Chief Justice to see that he does.
Hi L.D., Clarence Thomas is morally weak. Ginny is conniving - and I believe she offered her husband's influence to Mark Meadows and Donald Trump on January 6. She was so anxious to reach them, telling them over and over to 'press on' and 'don't give up.' She went to the January 6th committee (voluntarily after receiving their letter); and had no trouble claiming mea culpa and "I wish I had never sent the text messages." Of course.
Those messages are and were incriminating enough that Jack Smith can call for a Grand Jury investigation and let the Grand Jury decide if she warrants an indictment. Until then, Ginny and Clarence will continue to thumb their noses at us. And drive the motor home to Costco and home.
V
Your points are well taken, but I think I’d go further on Clarence and call him totally morally bankrupt. What’s worse, he’s arrogant and believes he’s untouchable in his lofty position. He knows that while he could be impeached, like Trump, the Republicans need him right where he is and the Senate would never come up with a two-thirds vote to convict.
I must say that I think it would be a stretch to successfully prosecute her. Also, Smith has a lot bigger fish to fry. I think he’s brilliant. It’s just a shame that Garland waited so long to appoint a Special Prosecutor. I think that he’ll be the one going down in the history books as the guy who dropped the ball. LDM
I ageee about Clarence Thomas. He was never qualified as a Supreme Court justice. The fact that he was inserted as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall is an insult to anyone who has ever worked to further social justice. it was a terrible decision then and it’s been horrific for the United States. Indeed, he is horrid and has harmed so many citizens with his pretend conservative votes. He’s a recipient of affirmative action and has taken that away. He is a minority yet he has come right out and said that he will vote to remove same-sex marriage rights (there is a bill in Hawaii now requesting a change to the constitution to offer protection for their same-sex marriage law simply because Clarence Thomas has been vocal about reversing same-sex marriage at this Supreme Court level. There is nothing concrete on which I can make this kind of suggestion or suspect his motives, but I wonder if he’s working on getting another motorhome with these votes and promises to vote as the conservative puppet masters prefer.Or he may even be angling to get his own island, like Mike Johnson gained after he became speaker with only $30,000 in his bank account. Who could have guessed the value of a ‘pay for play ‘ vote.