• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

January 6 Hearings Live

The Ginni Thomas texts create a serious crisis for the Supreme Court
The House Select Committee investigating the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol is reportedly in possession of these text messages in which she presses Meadows to illegally overturn the election in favor of Trump. “Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down,” reads one message.

“I can’t see Americans swallowing the obvious fraud. Just going with one more thing with no frickin consequences,” reads another. “We just cave to people wanting Biden to be anointed? Many of us can’t continue the GOP charade.”

To make matters worse, Justice Thomas was the court’s only dissent in Trump’s failed bid to prevent the House Select Committee from obtaining key Presidential records.
Click to expand...
Ginni Thomas Pressed Trump’s Chief of Staff to Overturn 2020 Vote, Texts Show - The New York Times - "Messages between Justice Clarence Thomas’s wife and Mark Meadows are the first evidence that she directly advised the White House to reverse the election results."
In one message sent in the days after the election, she urged the chief of staff, Mark Meadows, to “release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down,” invoking a slogan popular on the right that refers to a web of conspiracy theories that Trump supporters believed would overturn the election.

In another, she wrote: “I can’t see Americans swallowing the obvious fraud. Just going with one more thing with no frickin consequences.” She added: “We just cave to people wanting Biden to be anointed? Many of us can’t continue the GOP charade.”
Click to expand...

Also
Virginia Thomas urged White House chief to pursue unrelenting efforts to overturn the 2020 election, texts show - The Washington Post - "In messages to Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in the weeks after Election Day, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called Biden’s victory “the greatest Heist of our History” and told him that President Donald Trump should not concede."
and
Ginni Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas' wife, exchanged texts with Mark Meadows about efforts to overturn the 2020 election - CBS News

Also this fun tidbit.
Bill Barr says Trump got "madder and madder" when challenged on unfounded allegations of election fraud - CBS News

It says a lot that Trump made Atty. Gnrl. Barr seem decent.
 
The Ginni Thomas texts create a serious crisis for the Supreme Court
"Ginni Thomas’s text messages present a legitimacy crisis for the Supreme Court. Justice Thomas has refused to recuse himself from cases associated with January 6th and Trump’s attempt to overthrow the results of the 2020 Presidential election."

"... The Supreme Court has no enforcement mechanism and relies entirely on the goodwill of state and federal actors to respect their rulings. If the Court continues down its current path, its future may be one with little functional political power."
 
Opinion | Ginni and Clarence Thomas Are Making a Mockery of the Supreme Court - The New York Times
"Ginni and Clarence Thomas Have Done Enough Damage"

Jesse Wegman editorializes "What did Justice Clarence Thomas know, and when did he know it?"

From the Watergate scandal: The Curious History of ‘What Did the President Know, and When Did He Know It?’ | Brennan Center for Justice

JW continued with how Justice Thomas is causing trouble for the reputation of the Supreme Court by refusing to recuse himself from cases involving the Jan. 6 attacks.
 
The funny thing is this, based on Thomas's previous rulings and opinions, are we really worried that he was influenced by his wife? The guy voted against Lawrence v Texas!
 
SLD said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
The funny thing is this, based on Thomas's previous rulings and opinions, are we really worried that he was influenced by his wife? The guy voted against Lawrence v Texas!
Click to expand...
Because his wife told him to
Click to expand...
....which makes this a good time to put up this lovely piece of art:

1648475722477.png
 
Misogyny?
It has been a lot of decades since anyone accused me of misogyny, and it wasn't true then.
FWIW, that horrid image speaks even more poorly of black people than of women. But in fact, it doesn't refer to either group, just to two individual pieces of human detritus.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/28/jan-6-committee-thomas-trump/

The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection will seek an interview with Virginia Thomas, a conservative activist and the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, according to a person familiar with the investigation.

Virginia Thomas, who goes by Ginni, has drawn scrutiny for her text messages to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in which she repeatedly pressed Meadows to work aggressively to overturn the 2020 election and keep President Donald Trump in power in a series of urgent exchanges in the critical weeks after the vote, according to copies of the messages obtained by The Washington Post and CBS News.
The messages — 29 in all — reveal an extraordinary pipeline between Thomas, a conservative activist, and Trump’s top aide during a period when Trump and his allies were vowing to go to the Supreme Court in an effort to negate the election results.
Click to expand...

Separately, the committee is poised to vote Monday night on holding two former Trump aides in criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with the committee’s subpoenas.
The committee will meet to consider a report recommending holding former trade and manufacturing director Peter Navarro and former communications chief Daniel Scavino Jr. for criminal contempt of Congress. If the committee approves the matter, the House would vote on whether to refer Navarro and Scavino to the Justice Department for prosecution.
Click to expand...

:parrot:
 
blastula said:
www.politico.com

Trump likely committed felony obstruction, federal judge rules

A federal judge ruled that former President Donald Trump “more likely than not” attempted to illegally obstruct Congress.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

Garland, do your job already.
Click to expand...
The Attorney General of the United States (United States Attorney General?) is never going to move forward when a Federal Court judge states a former President “more likely than not” committed obstruction. That isn't the conviction certainty any AG would indict a former US President on. It has to be dead on balls, Cawthorn voters would even vote guilty, Trumps pro bono Constitutional lawyers checkmate level guilty.

This is the fragility our Democracy actually suffers from. Mueller explained all of this years ago... it is a Constitutional problem with a Constitutional Solution. The GOP obstructed that solution. You can't take a person to court where everything gets appealed to SCOTUS.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
blastula said:
www.politico.com

Trump likely committed felony obstruction, federal judge rules

A federal judge ruled that former President Donald Trump “more likely than not” attempted to illegally obstruct Congress.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

Garland, do your job already.
Click to expand...
The Attorney General of the United States (United States Attorney General?) is never going to move forward when a Federal Court judge states a former President “more likely than not” committed obstruction. That isn't the conviction certainty any AG would indict a former US President on. It has to be dead on balls, Cawthorn voters would even vote guilty, Trumps pro bono Constitutional lawyers checkmate level guilty.

This is the fragility our Democracy actually suffers from. Mueller explained all of this years ago... it is a Constitutional problem with a Constitutional Solution. The GOP obstructed that solution. You can't take a person to court where everything gets appealed to SCOTUS.
Click to expand...
Yes, the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. The standard the judge just cited is for a civil case, I.e. a preponderance of the evidence.
 
So the committee has people testifying that they were talking to trump by phone during that period, and their phone logs.
It shouldn't be too hard to demonstrate that he was either using a burner phone, or calling from others' phones.
Either way, it's obvious and intentional, which should be pretty easy to prove.
 
Worldtraveller said:
So the committee has people testifying that they were talking to trump by phone during that period, and their phone logs.
It shouldn't be too hard to demonstrate that he was either using a burner phone, or calling from others' phones.
Either way, it's obvious and intentional, which should be pretty easy to prove.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this should be enough to put him in prison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD
Loren Pechtel said:
Worldtraveller said:
So the committee has people testifying that they were talking to trump by phone during that period, and their phone logs.
It shouldn't be too hard to demonstrate that he was either using a burner phone, or calling from others' phones.
Either way, it's obvious and intentional, which should be pretty easy to prove.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this should be enough to put him in prison.
Click to expand...
It’s strong evidence of criminal intent. This is pathetic.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
blastula said:
www.politico.com

Trump likely committed felony obstruction, federal judge rules

A federal judge ruled that former President Donald Trump “more likely than not” attempted to illegally obstruct Congress.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

Garland, do your job already.
Click to expand...
The Attorney General of the United States (United States Attorney General?) is never going to move forward when a Federal Court judge states a former President “more likely than not” committed obstruction. That isn't the conviction certainty any AG would indict a former US President on. It has to be dead on balls, Cawthorn voters would even vote guilty, Trumps pro bono Constitutional lawyers checkmate level guilty.

This is the fragility our Democracy actually suffers from. Mueller explained all of this years ago... it is a Constitutional problem with a Constitutional Solution. The GOP obstructed that solution. You can't take a person to court where everything gets appealed to SCOTUS.
Click to expand...

The judge didn't go over all the evidence available, but the "Crime-fraud exception" section in his ruling reads like a good start to an indictment. He didn't say the evidence was insufficient to criminally convict, and the standard he used is certainly enough to investigate. Maybe Garland is investigating this, but if so they are keeping it airtight. They are investigating 1/6, but no word on whether on Trump himself.

Jan. 6 criminal probe expands to rally planning, financing - The Washington Post.

Forget 1/6, Garland could easily prosecute Trump on obstruction, Mueller already did the work.

He should have at least indicted Meadows on contempt by now.

The putz NY DA Bragg already punked out on Trump. We will see about Garland. Time is limited to get this done.

Trump Is Guilty of ‘Numerous’ Felonies, Prosecutor Who Resigned Says - The New York Times.
One of the senior Manhattan prosecutors who investigated Donald J. Trump believed that the former president was “guilty of numerous felony violations” and that it was “a grave failure of justice” not to hold him accountable, according to a copy of his resignation letter.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom