Elections January 6 Supreme Court

Could Ginni Thomas Be Facing A Subpoena From The January 6 Committee?

Now that we know Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, was actively involved in trying to have the 2020 presidential election overturned by pressing lawmakers in Arizona to appoint a slate of fake electors who would hand the state to Donald Trump, questions are being raised about whether or not Ms. Thomas should be subpoenaed by the House Select Committee investigating that January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection.

According to The Washington Post, Ginni Thomas did much more than just talk to her husband in the days after it became clear Joe Biden would be the next president:

Just days after media organizations called the race for Biden in Arizona and nationwide, Thomas urged the lawmakers to “stand strong in the face of political and media pressure.” She told the lawmakers that the responsibility to choose electors was “yours and yours alone” and said they had “power to fight back against fraud.”

Thomas sent the messages via an online platform designed to make it easy to send prewritten form emails to multiple elected officials, according to a review of the emails, obtained under the state’s public-records law.

The messages show that Thomas, a staunch supporter of Donald Trump, was more deeply involved in the effort to overturn Biden’s win than has been previously reported. In sending the emails, Thomas played a role in the extraordinary scheme to keep Trump in office by substituting the will of legislatures for the will of voters.

That report led former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance to say Saturday during an appearance on MSNBC that Ms. Thomas should indeed be served a subpoena by the Jan. 6 committee:

“If Ginni Thomas was anyone else with the sort of knowledge she’s displayed on multiple issues, investigators would sit down and have a chat with her, not necessarily that she’s a target for investigation, but they would want to know what she knows. And most importantly, here, is this incredible coincidence that she’s out pushing this same scheme that we know ultimately comes to fruition among those closest to Trump, this scheme to create blank slates of electors. Electors who aren’t the choice of the people, who instead are pansies for the former president. People who are supposed to go in and do his work for him.

“That’s a little bit too close for comfort, that coincidence. So that warrants further investigation.”

Ginni Thomas should be compelled to testify under oath, and it would be even better if she had to do so during the committee’s public hearings, which begin early next month.

Abortion Supreme Court WTF?!

Disturbing Video Shows Anti-Abortion Activists Telling Pro-Choice Protesters ‘Your Body Is Mine’

Across the country over the weekend, pro-choice supporters protested, which is their right under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

In New York, video taken of anti-abortion activists heckling pro-choice marchers has gone viral.

Four men are seen standing on the steps of a New York church, with one (wearing a pullover complete with an “FDNY” patch) shouting:

“You have no choice. Not your choice, not your body, your body is mine.”

FDNY is the designation for the Fire Department of New York, which led to this comment from the actual FDNY:

“A video circulating from a protest in Manhattan over the weekend shows an individual wearing a FDNY sweatshirt,” Frank Dwyer, the FDNY’s deputy commissioner of public information, said.

“The individual in the video is not a member of the FDNY. The comments made do not represent the views of the FDNY. The matter is under investigation.”

The same man is also wearing a cap which reads “America First,” a group headed by Nick Fuentes, an avowed white nationalist who also espouses white supremacy.

“Not the church, not the state, the people must decide their fate,” chant the protesters, to which the FDNY man responds:

“I am the people. The people have decided, the court has decided, you lose.

“You have no choice. Not your choice, not your body, your body is mine – and you’re having my baby.”

Another video taken around the same time shows a larger contingency of men who also harass the pro-choice marchers:

Is this what conservatives on the Supreme Court want to see happen across the United States? If so, is another civil war on the horizon?

Abortion Supreme Court

Laurence Tribe Calls Alito’s Draft Abortion Opinion ‘Intellectually Bankrupt’

The draft opinion in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization which was leaked earlier this week to Politico was crafted by Justice Samuel Alito, but the legal foundation it’s based upon is badly flawed, according to constitutional law expert Laurence Tribe, who currently serves as Professor Emeritus at Harvard University.

Tribe spoke with MSNBC host Alex Witt on Sunday and made it clear he doesn’t think the Alito opinion has any value whatsoever, telling the host:

“I think it is intellectual and historically bankrupt. The founding document did not list all of the rights we have. It doesn’t say anything about our right to marry, our rights to decide how to bring up our children, our freedom to think what we will. It protects liberty in very broad terms. It protects equality.”

Tribe then explained why Alito’s reasoning is fundamentally flawed:

“This idea by Justice Alito — he is backed by the right-wing of the court and by many right-wing activists, this idea that the Constitution protects only those rights that are listed and those rights that are rooted in a misogynist history that really did not take account of women at all. It is simply a prescription for turning the clock back, not just to the 1950s, but to the 1850s. It is a regressive approach, it is not consistent with our trajectory of constitutional rights, which have expanded and expanded.”

Instead of expanding the rights granted to Americans, Tribe explained, Alito and the four conservatives who are joining him — Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett — are going to strip away one that’s existed for 50 years:

“This will be the first time that the Supreme Court has taken away by a majority vote of people who were put on the court by someone who did not even win the majority of the American people, the first time that a basic right has been taken away, that people have built their lives around for 50 years. Justice Alito says, ‘Oh, there has not been any big reliance on it, women have the vote now, women are all over the place, they are in the workplace’ they don’t need this right.’ That’s ridiculous.

“Women have risen into positions of approximate equality largely because the Supreme Court 50 years ago, or nearly 50 years ago, affirmed for them the right that we have long had, which is the right to control our own bodies and our own destinies. To roll that back is really to go back to the dark ages. We really should not let that happen.”

Abortion Donald Trump Jr. Social Media Supreme Court WTF?!

WTF?! Don Jr. Says SCOTUS Abortion Ruling Was Leaked Because Elon Musk Is Buying Twitter

In what may well go down in history as one of the most vapid and moronic statements ever made by a human being, Donald Trump Jr. claimed Sunday during an appearance on Fox News that the reason a draft opinion of a Supreme Court ruling was leaked to Politico this week is because Elon Musk is buying Twitter.

Good luck trying to figure out that sort of convoluted logic.

Don Jr. was a guest on “Sunday Morning Futures,” where he told host Maria Bartiromo:

“These people (liberals) are living in a bubble. They’re not looking for a level playing field. They’re looking for an advantage. They were always thrilled when they have that advantage as though they don’t have enough advantages already.”

He then added:

“They had all of social media, again, until you came up with Truth Social and then Elon Musk said, ‘Hey, how about some free speech on Twitter as well?’ Oh my God! You know, the outrage and the panic. And you see it.

“And that’s why you see the leak about the Supreme Court. They need something and they have nothing to motivate their people.”

What?! What in the hell does all that even mean? Elon Musk is trying to buy Twitter, so that led to Justice Samuel Alito writing an opinion that will overturn Roe v. Wade? And then a liberal leaked the opinion to “motivate” Democratic voters?

A conservative could just as easily have been the leaker, as Jonathan Chait of New York magazine pointed out earlier this week when he appeared on MSNBC:

“I want to be clear that I have no idea who leaked this and it definitely could have come from the left. but I wrote this because so much of the commentary from the right simply assumed that the leaks that come from the left and ignored the fact that we have a smaller leak three days before from the Wall Street Journal that had the same effect they’re decrying, which is to put public pressure on the justices to rule in a certain way. That is the reason why they say this leak is so dangerous, because it subjects the justices to this kind of lobbying and that is exactly why the Wall Street Journal was leaked this early version, and they really had the inside scoop on the breakdown inside of the court.”

It has long been suggested that Donald Trump Jr. may have a substance abuse problem. Based on what he said earlier today, he’s either on drugs or even dumber than we thought.

Abortion GOP Supreme Court U.S. Senate

Lindsey Graham: I Can’t Believe People Are Upset Kavanaugh Lied About Overturning Roe At His Confirmation

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Sunday that he’s shocked some of his colleagues in the Senate are upset Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh lied about overturning Roe v. Wade during his confirmation hearings in 2018.

Fox host Bret Baier noted that Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said this week she’s angry Kavanaugh told her he would likely not vote to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe ruling:

“Some senators are now openly questioning whether they were misled in the confirmation hearings.”

Graham replied:

“This has not been well-accepted by the public. The public has been divided since 1973. Ask your next guest, who is a good friend, does he want the court to reconsider [Citizens United] regarding campaign finance laws? Would he welcome a revisiting of the Heller decision where the court said the Second Amendment was a personal right?”

The public has been divided on the issue of a woman’s right to choose? Polls released just this week show otherwise, with a Washington Post-ABC News poll indicating that “54 percent of Americans think the 1973 Roe decision should be upheld while 28 percent believe it should be overturned — a roughly 2-to-1 margin.”

Graham continued:

“So my liberal friends don’t mind the court overturning decisions they don’t like. They very much are against overturning decisions that they agree with. So you can’t bargain your way into getting onto the court. So any senator who tries to bargain with a nominee — will you uphold the case I like or overturn the ones I don’t — is really doing a disservice to the court.”

Notice how Graham completely avoided saying if a justice should be punished for lying under oath during a confirmation hearing? Apparently the senator is fine with perjury as long as it’s done in the service of conservative ideals.