In Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest, Cecily observes “I have never met any really wicked person before… I am so afraid he will look just like every one else.” The quote came to mind this week after Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) demanded an investigation of Ginni Thomas. Whitehouse insists that there is a “big investigative gap” in pursuing the leaker of the draft Supreme Court opinion in the pending abortion case, but not the wife of Clarence Thomas. Ginni Thomas supported the challenge to the certification of the 2020 election.
Even in the age of rage, the investigation of the spouse of a sitting justice due to her political views is shocking. However, other members and even legal experts have called for such investigations or the actual impeachment of her husband.
Rep. IIhan Omar (D., Minn.) was the first member of Congress to call for Thomas to be impeached when it was revealed that the Jan. 6th Commission found 29 messages of his wife, Ginni, to the White House. MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan echoed the call for impeachment as did former Sen. Barbara Boxer and others. Boxer was particularly ironic since she used the same underlying federal law to challenge the certification of George W. Bush’s election.
The position of Ginni Thomas on the election was no surprise. She is a well-known Republican activist and Trump supporter. In her communications, Thomas encouraged then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to pursue legal and legislative challenges to what she viewed as a stolen election. That was a position supported by millions of voters.
We have come a long way from the days when spouses were viewed as mere extensions of their husbands. Ginni Thomas is an activist and the couple has often discussed how they keep their professional lives apart. Yet, these members are suggesting that Justice Thomas can be investigated or impeached because he essentially failed to keep his wife in line and silent on this national controversy.
On MSNBC’s “The Last Word,” Sen. Whitehouse mocked “how Chief Justice Roberts went to DEFCON 1 over the leak of the Alito abortion opinion and demanded investigations and said it was a betrayal of the court.”
Yet, he noted “If you look at the Ginni Thomas situation … it seems to me that when you have the spouse of the Supreme Court justice now repeatedly connected with an insurrection against the country and now connected with an individual who is so deeply in trouble that a White House, a Trump White House legal counsel advised him to get a criminal defense attorney, that if you are going to go to DEFCON 1 over the leak of a draft opinion, you might want to consider going to DEFCON 3 or 4 or 5 and start investigating within the court what the heck is going on here.” He asked why Chief Justice Roberts is “unwilling to look at its own problems as regards Justice Thomas.”
The reason may be that leaking the opinion is clearly unethical and potentially criminal conduct. What Ginni Thomas did is called free speech. Thomas had every right to call for a challenge to the election even though some of us viewed the effort as unfounded. Marriage to a justice does not come with some form of indentured servitude where you must suspend the exercise of constitutional rights like freedom of speech.
The challenge to the 2020 election was no surprise. Indeed, not long after the election, I wrote about that possibility in what I called the “Death Star strategy.” It is not a crime to plan such a challenge, even without good cause. It was the same course taken by Democrats without any outcry from the media in challenging Republican presidents.
When Boxer launched her own challenge to President Bush on this law, Speaker Nancy Pelosi praised her challenge as “witnessing Democracy at work. This isn’t as some of our Republican colleagues have referred to it, sadly, as frivolous. This debate is fundamental to our democracy.” Joining her in that challenge was Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), who now chairs the committee looking into the Jan. 6th riot, challenged the election of George W. Bush. (Fellow Committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sought to challenge Trump’s certification in 2016).
We certainly could investigate Ginni Thomas to confirm that she “looks just like every one else” in Washington. She is someone who speaks her mind as a conservative activist. She is also the spouse of a Supreme Court justice. Her professional and marital positions are entirely separate and distinct.
Obviously, Sen. Whitehouse is not the first to yield to the sensational over the sensible in venting about the Court. There is little attraction for the sensible in cable. As Cecily added in the Wilde play, “I don’t think I would like to catch a sensible man. I shouldn’t know what to talk to him about.”
Again with this “overturning the results of an election” nonsense.
Are you daft ? Do the courts have the authority to reject fraudulent ballots ? Of course they do.
Overturning the results of a fraudulent or lawless election is not merely constitutional, it is REQUIRED.
When you RANT that no one has the constitutional power to overturn an election – you are openly claiming that no election can be so fraudulent or lawless that it can be overturned.
You and the left keep tossing about the term “overturn the election” – as if elections are sacred – no matter how badly conducted, how lawless or fraudulent.
YOU KNOW BETTER.
Attempting to “Overturn an election” is INHERENTLY lawful. Specific means by which you attempt to overturn an election – may not be lawful.
Pence was given specific powers by the constitution and the law. The fact that he has a power means he may excercise it or not – that he has a choice.
When you faux frame the argument as Pence may not “overturn the election” – you are obviously WRONG.
The question is not whether he can – or more accurately when can he take steps that might lead to overturning the election – because no one – not the VP, not senators, not congressmen have the unilateral power to overturn an election. But they EACH have the power to use what power they do have to MOVE TOWARDS overturning the election.
Which BTW is PRECISELY what happened in 1872.
Tilden was the apparent winner of an election rife with allegations of fraud. Congress – including the VP participated in first delaying certification, then appointing a commission to investigate the fraud and ultimately certifying Harris rather than Tilden as the winner.
Obviously this is constitutional and legal – it has been done before.
Even With Pences cooperation it is unlikely that Trump would have gotten the result Harris got in 1872, but that does not make attempting to a crime.
Michael Cohen decodes Trump’s mob-style threats against Pence: Trump’s “I don’t want to be your friend” comment to Pence was less the taunt of an emotional 5 yr old than it was a Mafia boss signal…
Yeah, you’d know.
Is tyranny only bad when it is directed at Americans?
No, but it gets our attention faster.
If you want to be free, should you kill the people who don’t want you to be free? Should Putin and Xi be at the top of the list? Should there be a great effort, a la the Manhattan Project, to make these illegitimate tyrants dead?
My my, Walter Mitty has nothing on you.
Should Russia and China be expelled from the United Nations? Has the UN charter gone the way of the Articles of Confederation? Should it be redrafted so that only multiparty democracies can be members? Should the requirements for becoming members of the United Nations be as stringent as becoming members of NATO or the European Union?
After reading this article, one thing immediately caught my eye: Mrs Thomas uses her married name. Why do so many women (assumption) in Washington NOT use their married name?
Examples:
Anthony Fauci’s wife – Christine Grady
Mitch McConnell’s wife – Elaine Chao
Alan Greenspan, ex-FEDeral Reserve – Andrea Mitchell
Chucky Schumer’s wife – Iris Weinshall
You can probably think of many others. DC operatives use their influence to get their wives lucrative federal jobs and try to hide from the appearance of nepotism.
Not just the big names but others in government in DC do the same.
As for Iris Weinshall: she was named the New York City Department of Transportation commissioner in 2000. Then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani appointed Weinshall to the job. She remained at the department until 2007, staying even when Michael Bloomberg became mayor.
911 connection?
The other ‘connections’ are pretty obvious.
Is Turley A Competent Law Professor?
Professor Turley writes:
“In her communications, (Ginni) Thomas encouraged then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to pursue legal and legislative challenges to what she viewed as a stolen election. That was a position supported by millions of voters”.
………………………………………………………………
Johnathan Turley is frequently featured as a ‘Constitutional Scholar’ in his capacity as a broadcast pundit and columnist. Therefore he certainly grasps that Vice Presidents have no authority to hold up certification of the presidential election.
Yet Turley is willing to excuse Virginia Thomas for not understanding the certification process. How peculiar that seems. We would expect more from the wife of a Supreme Court Justice. And that’s the problem here.
Did husband Clarence ‘not’ explain to his wife that Vice President Pence had no authority to suspend certification? One would think that Justice Thomas would set his wife straight, knowing her activism.
Justice Thomas, one presumes, would not want his wife spreading disinformation; or taking part in extralegal schemes.
So logically he would sit her down and say, “Vice President Pence can only certify. Please don’t involve yourself in Donald Trump’s machinations”.
But the fact that Justice Thomas failed to set his wife straight raises serious questions. ‘Did a member of the court signal approval of a coup attempt?’
If not, ‘Why then was his wife so misinformed?’
And why is Johnathan Turley, a Constitutional Scholar, so willing to overlook Ginni Thomas’ ignorance? Does Professor Turley have low expectations regarding the wives of high-placed officials?
This brings us back to the original question, ‘Is Johnathan Turley a competent law professor?’
Would Turley tell his students, “Sometimes the wives of high officials are totally misinformed. But they’re entitled to their opinions so you have to respect that. Even if they promote extralegal plots”.
No, Turley wouldn’t say that to his law students. So why is he saying that here?
Perhaps the Blog Stooge has influenced Johnathan Turley. Giving Turley the idea that Ginni Thomas was doing nothing unusual in sending all those emails.
This Turkey arrogantly believes his knowledge of the law to be infallible. With such beliefs, he wants to tell Ginni what to think and how to act while proclaiming the professor ignorant. Such arrogance is the nature of a stupid fellow.
This turkey is also a chauvinist. “Thomas would set his wife straight.” It sounds as if he would advocate Thomas beating her as well until she has no opinions of her own.
Some of the opinions we hear on this blog sink to new lows daily. America is undergoing a brain drain.
Ginny Thomas is NOT about Jan 6, this is about trying to force Justice Thomas out so Biden can appoint another far leftie like the Jackson Brown. It’s C all about controlling the Courts and these Democrats will cheat, steal, twist laws, ignore laws, break laws and even encourage murder to get their agenda done. PERIOD.
“Is Turley A Competent Law Professor?”
With Biden’s “disinformation” campaign (i.e., censorship) back in gear, the smear campaign against Turley heats back up.
And you lied about Turley’s argument.
Do you realize how sexist and misogynistic you sound? Gianni Thomas is a wife and individual. She has her own opinions and got you to say “ Justice Thomas should had set her straight so she as the obedient wifey would not be involved?!s
Cite from Eastman’s own briefs the PRECISE language that you beleive constitutes a crime.
Otherwise go away.
You keep engaging in Spin. The constitution – as well as federal election law give congressmen and the vice president roles.
Those roles are NOT ceremonial. They have CHOICES, and because the constitution and the law give them choices – those choices are inherently legal.
The Whole Eastman/Pence nonsense is completely undermined by the fact that the House and Senate are working to pas new election law that eliminates the choices Eastman wanted to see excercised.
If you have to change the law to make something illegal – then it was not illegal before.
Let’s hear it for Stephen Colbert.
IMPEACH MERRICK GARLAND for DERELICTION of DUTY for REFUSAL to ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW
The Supreme Court building is completely barricaded so that the public cannot get near it — front steps or back entries. But Merrick Garland is allowing terrorizing, intimidation protests to continue (for over 46 days) directly in front of the FAMILY HOMES of justices, threatening them while they are deciding a pending case, creating clear and present danger to the justices and their children and their neighbors It is unlawful intimdation of federal judges and it must be stopped.
Lets impeach Garland, Biden Harris and their entire cabal for their dereliction of duty in refusing to enforce federal immigration law
We can investigate Ginni right after we investigate Biden for taking “inappropriate” (her words) showers with his underage daughter who, also in her own words, became “hypersexualized” thereafter. Pedophilia has always been the Left’s Achilles Heel. Damn projecting, deflecting perverts.
Turley claims:
“The position of Ginni Thomas on the election was no surprise. She is a well-known Republican activist and Trump supporter. In her communications, Thomas encouraged then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to pursue legal and legislative challenges to what she viewed as a stolen election. That was a position supported by millions of voters.”
Really?
Here is one of her texts to Meadows:
“Biden crime family & ballot fraud co-conspirators (elected officials, bureaucrats, social media censorship mongers, fake stream media reporters, etc) are being arrested & detained for ballot fraud right now & over coming days, & will be living in barges off GITMO to face military tribunals for sedition.”
Is it any wonder that Turley would not publish such Infowars-type nonsense when defending Ginni’s “legal and legislative challenges.”
I doubt that she wants the Trumpists who are being prosecuted for seditious conspiracy to be “living in barges off GITMO to face military tribunals.” She shouldn’t be envisioning that for anyone.
Is it any wonder that Turley would not publish such Infowars-type nonsense when defending Ginni’s “legal and legislative challenges.”
That’s why Whitehouse want to impeach Thomas?
In contrast to JT, my view is that when a Presidential candidate concedes the election like Kerry did in 2004 and Clinton did in 2016 the American people can be confident that there will be a peaceful and orderly transition of power and any challenges to the election by other people are just background noise. The Trump situation was far more serious with no concession, the power of the presidency, a multi-prig effort to change the results, and what happened on Jan 6th.
Meant to say multi-prong
Breaking ‘norms’ again. Right.
2000 was before your time?
Now do the Biden Adminstration plotting ways to override SCOTUS and Dobbs decision.
Doesn’t our Republic DEMAND all of Government accept and support Supreme Court Decisions?
Even in 2000, Gore accepted the Supreme Court decision, conceded the next day, and presided over the counting of his electoral loss. House Dem challenges to the Florida vote was mere background noise because Gore had conceded.
Last night, nine Colbert staffers got arrested for breaking into our nation’s capitol.
Will they get the same treatment that Jan6 protestors got?
Es Pregunta
good catch but the plot thickens. Adam Schiff gave them entry. Shout out to U.S. Representative Barry Loudermilk. Oh Lawdy….LOL
9 Staffers Working For Stephen Colbert’s Late Show Arrested at U.S. Capitol For Illegal Entry
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/9-staffers-working-for-stephen-colberts-late-show-arrested-at-u-s-capitol-for-illegal-entry/
….the CBS employees were let into the building by Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Jake Auchincloss (D-MA).
No les pasará nada. Porque el Estado de Derecho está muerto.
Fat chance!
The investigation of the spouse of a sitting justice due to her political views is not nearly as shocking as the need to investigate.
I must chuckle over the spin here… that Ginni’s attempts to subvert the election and the Constitution are referred to as “political views.”
Let’s hold hearings on the hundreds of bureaucrats, including former politicians and intelligence officers, who attempted to subvert the 2016 election by convincing gullible Americans that HRC was the lawful president.
I challenge you to consult scientific polling in 2017, 2018 and 2019. The data indicates that a higher percentage of Americans believed that HRC was the legitimate president, compared to the figure believing that DJT is the legitimate president today.
And why did so many Americans believe this? Because HRC, former CIA officers, former FBI officers and current/former politicians lied, some under oath, to that effect. They knew they were lying, but did so anyway.
So, let’s hold hearings. Let’s subpoena all of Maddow’s text messages, from 2017 thru 2021, to see how she collaborated with radicals and extremists who lied to the American people.
lets also go after all the people who were pressuring electors to change their votes to Hillary in 2016
You are a brain washed fool. You have no idea how stupid you sound. Your Democratic Party is as corrupt as the days are long here in summertime northern Michigan. Gross!
Meanwhile, a guy who firebombed an NYC police car during the “Summer of Love 2020” gets a reprieve from home arrest.
Colinford Mattis is a Princeton-educated lawyer who was just allowed out of home confinement so that he could attend a friend’s wedding in DC.
Meanwhile, how many January 6 peaceful protestors are still incarcerated?
“For my friends everything, for my enemies the law”
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17246934/united-states-v-mattis/
Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest, Cecily observes “I have never met any really wicked person before… I am so afraid he will look just like every one else.”
Oscar Wilde was known for being brutally honest. Drag queens are notoriously honest, like Kitty Demure. Well done!
A reminder that the Repubs went ballistic after AG Lynch spoke with Bill Clinton on the tarmac. Why is it any more acceptable for Ginni Thomas to be exchanging emails with Eastman and Meadows?
Anon: Oh great pseudo-savant one. Is that an esoteric or exoteric question. If you can’t see the differnce, no need to attempt until you get over that AC inversion. The spouse is not the justice. She is a conserative, oh hell the Prof has already apprise you in his posting.
Bill Clinton is also the spouse.
…of the one running for office. Pseudo-savant. Perfect.
And Ginni Thomas was exchanging emails with Eastman and Meadows about the Trump campaign, pseudo-savant.
So what? Make your claim. People are permitted to exchange views. Your disagreement doesn’t count. You don’t count. You want to count by interfering in the lives of others. You are a Stalinist.
Anon: Cut the crock. BC was her (LYNCH’S) appointer as POTUS. We now KNOW Hill had lied, destroyed items that had been suppeoned, and would be subpeopned, and WHAT IS THAT? a CRIME?
Idiocy, can’t see a difference. We know why.
Well, Bill’s wifey was under investigation at the time.
Neither Ginni nor Clarence are under investigation.
I’m not even sure how you got to that analogy–its not analogous at all.
Eastman is under investigation. He may well be disbarred. And some of Meadows’ communications were the subject of the ruling that Clarence wanted to stay, whereas his SCOTUS colleagues disagreed. Again: Ginni has been in touch with both Eastman and Meadows about how to keep Trump in office after he lost.
“Eastman is under investigation.”
Without any good reason.
“He may well be disbarred.”
Clinesmith returned to the bar after lying and being disbarred. He should never have been readmitted. The rule of law was broken by Democrats and leftists. When the rule of law is broken we see despotic governments arise. You like the Stalinist type. That is the justification for your stupid comments.
When dealing with this type of fellow one has to realize that the discussion is unbalanced. Anonymous the Stupid will lie, cheat and deceive while others are left only with the truth.
Does anyone give a Rat’s Hind End what Whitehouse wants or says?
The guy is an embarrassment….look in the Dictionary…..his photo is beside the word.
If all the women were fired from their job because of something their husband said employment would be at an all time high. The leftist like women voicing their opinions like AOC but if a conservative women voices her opinion they say that her husband should loose his job. Guess what Democrats, Clarence Thomas is going to tell you to put it where the sun don’t shine. Has anyone noticed that the approval of a Supreme Court justice by Joe Biden has not been met by a storming of the Capitol building by Republicans. Need I remind you that it was the Democrats who stormed the Capitol when Kavanaugh was up for confirmation. Professor Turley correctly points out the hypocrisy of the left. Without hypocrisy they have nothing left to offer to the American people.
The Kavanaugh protesters didn’t “storm” the building. They went through the standard security checks. Not one of them broke into the building like these guys:
Know what I mean, Vern!