Ginni Thomas

Apologies because of my sick sense of humor. I thought what was posted (and is now retracted was funny-) but the point was that surely Ginni talks to her hubby, whenever they are in private.

I was just making light of the prior accusations of Justice Thomas' liking of a particular porn star, and he and Ginni having a safe word....all aligning to Jan 6.

If you were offended, I apologize. If you found it funny, you suffer the same sick sense of humor I have.

To the topic of whether Jenny actually discussed things with her husband, I don't think she sends him text messages or anything directly, but just like any wife or any spouse, those conversations probably happen directly versus in some recordable fashion.

I really don't think anybody here is naive enough to think that a politically passionate person like Ginni Thomas doesn't talk to her husband about her political beliefs. That would be absolutely absurd.

That being said I don't know how George Conway & his skank wife kellyanne Conway ever communicate directly-, but perhaps to them it's all a ruse & considered foreplay.

i'm impressed. you actually posted an entire paragraph. filled with leftist nonsense but a paragraph anyway.


since the left wants to make big noise about what Thompson's wife (a non official) says that may influence Clarence what do you say about what Hunter Biden says that may influence daddy? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Off topic...not about Hunters talk w pops....it's about Ginni Thomas

I was going to ignore ur post after the first paragraph since u basically blow off anything that goes against the left lol
But then u discussed pillow talk...so I assume you are totally for investigating polysilicon and her husband on how they seem to be amazing at the stock market since she has been in office? Seems apparent alot of pillow talk going on there.
Lol Originally Posted by chizzy

No doubt. I put a post out about all public office holders disclosing tax returns and holdings. Also on board for full ethics reviews for any seemingly improprieties. None of these elected ppl should be able to take advantage of private pertinent information.

Off topic...not about Hunters talk w pops....it's about Ginni Thomas Originally Posted by eyecu2

it's completely on topic since people are claiming somehow Ginni Thomas (i misspelled it Thompson is that your issue?) has "undue" influence on a Supreme Court justice. over texts about Jan 6th the "insurrection that never was". or "the election that was rigged, which it was".



just another example of the far left witch hunt to mask the real problem .. the Democratic Party and their far left socialist agenda

it's completely on topic since people are claiming somehow Ginni Thomas (i misspelled it Thompson is that your issue?) has "undue" influence on a Supreme Court justice. over texts about Jan 6th the "insurrection that never was". or "the election that was rigged, which it was".



just another example of the far left witch hunt to mask the real problem .. the Democratic Party and their far left socialist agenda Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

You are correct in that the crazy ass leftists in DC would be up in arms if the GOP did the same thing to Hunter as they did to Ginni Thomas. After all, using their logic, clearly a son talks to his father

If you believe that Ginni Thomas - (who this thread is about,) and her discussion of political or other topics to her husband, whom she sleeps next to, (assuming), is the same as the relationship Hunter has with his Dad, (who is not the topic of this thread even remotely), then you must have had way weirdly different father /son relationships than normal people.

Ginni was around on Jan 6.
Ginni had sent text messages to others- like Meadows, about stopping the normal transfer of power, and doing "everything they can" to not let Trump cede power to Biden.

Ginni certainly had opportunity and access to Clarence and if was so passionate about her stance, why would she be Mumm with her own hubby? Doesn't make sense.- unless you want to believe that all the sudden a wife doesn't talk to her hubby about the stuff she's that riled up about, that she would call/text the President's COS,cause that would make the argument palatable for the right, but completely out of norms for most women in marriages.

Hunter had nothing to do with Jan 6 or any of the context of the texts, or reasoning. The straw grasping committee here is apparently doing as much as they can to derail topics and Mods should help them understand that, since others are getting warnings.

Want to talk about Hunter?- start a new thread.

If you can't see the analogy TWK was making, that is on you not him.

Meanwhile, as noted below, the radical left and their media partners have subjected Ginni Thomas to a malicious and unrelenting assault with completely unsubstantiated smears because she dared have an opinion about the election.

It's despicable

Gianni Thomas is allowed to have and speak about whatever the fuck opinion she wants, to whoever the fuck she wants, including her husband. Neither of them are summarily stripped of their rights because they are, or are married to, a Supreme Court Justice. ,

Gianni Thomas is allowed to have and speak about whatever the fuck opinion she wants, to whoever the fuck she wants, including her husband. Neither of them are summarily stripped of their rights because they are, or are married to, a Supreme Court Justice. , Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Not saying she can't. But assumptively she would with her hubby,- which she denied doing.

Her connection of speaking with Meadows and her husband is what raises eyebrows, with her conclusions which were absolutely in conflict of the results of the elections that were certified by the states. She was onboard with disenfranchising individuals and states, even to a point of violating constitutional structure. The very thing her hubby is there to protect, hence the concern.

When people who are in position to influence those in power or those who make decisions that do have consequences, it is at that point her testimony needs to be fully transparent.

Ginni said she didn't speak to her hubby at the same time she's calling and texting Meadows is total bullshit. She knows it, you know it, and I know it.

Why lie about it??

Not saying she can't. But assumptively she would with her hubby,- which she denied doing.

Her connection of speaking with Meadows and her husband is what raises eyebrows, with her conclusions which were absolutely in conflict of the results of the elections that were certified by the states. She was onboard with disenfranchising individuals and states, even to a point of violating constitutional structure. The very thing her hubby is there to protect, hence the concern.

When people who are in position to influence those in power or those who make decisions that do have consequences, it is at that point her testimony needs to be fully transparent.

Ginni said she didn't speak to her hubby at the same time she's calling and texting Meadows is total bullshit. She knows it, you know it, and I know it.

Why lie about it?? Originally Posted by eyecu2

No, you don't know it, we don't know it, the only people that know it are her and her husband.

FACT.

I could give no fewer fucks if she spoke to her husband, or Meadows, or Jesus H Christ. She can have her opinion and give it to whoever she wants. I seem to remember a President who flat out said ‘If you elect me, you get her too’ (or something like that). Nobody freaked out.

She was onboard with disenfranchising individuals and states, even to a point of violating constitutional structure. Originally Posted by eyecu2

NO. That is NOT what she did. She shared her conviction, like millions of other Americans, that the 2020 election was conducted unfairly with irregularities that warranted challenges.

Challenges you know like the crazy ass leftists made in 2000, 2004, 2016, etc.

said she didn't speak to her hubby at the same time she's calling and texting Meadows is total bullshit. She knows it, you know it, and I know it. Originally Posted by eyecu2

UTTERLY FALSE. You don't know what she did - only she does. And she testified under oath she did not speak to her husband about this. And you know what, even Pelosi's puppets with the Soviet Show Trial believed she was telling the truth because she wasn’t mentioned once in the panel’s more than 800-page final report.

"Denial isn't just a river in Egypt."

The reason the Jan 6 committee didn't try to connect Ginni any further is there is no payoff in a attempt to do so. The committee was coming to it's final investigation and if they didn't see an absolute smoking gun, such as she paid for ppl to attend rallys or orchestrated in more detail, then what good would digging for more do. (As a board member of Turning point USA- she absolutely gave a green light for the 7 busses they paid for to come to the Jan 6 rally.) Plus Ginni isn't dumb, but she is a fucking liar and a cult 45 member. She has lied just like every fucking GOP house member who didn't vote to impeach King Trump. They didn't have backbone to hold a pussy grabbing obstructionist accountable. Ginni MOST CERTAINLY encouraged Meadows to seek a remedy that would have absolutely fucking disenfranchised voters from several States. How else would they be able to overturn an electoral college result? Bx2 you know better, and to say it's utterly false is an absolute lie.

The GOP is Power hungry and brainwashed.- Absolutely pathetic and ultimately sad.

And to those who don't give a fuck about who Ginni spoke to, I'm guessing you'll give the same latitude to Hunter Biden who is a free citizen and can talk to whoever the fuck he wants to also! Right?

Somehow you just ignore the facts. But hey, let's not take my word for it. Here is Jonathon Turley:

In the 895-page report, there was a conspicuous lack of any reference to Ginni Thomas. The media that pushed this exaggerated story for months followed a familiar pattern. They just shrugged and barely covered the fact the committee found nothing beyond...what some of us had previously noted: Ginni Thomas was a long-standing Republican activist who publicly supported Trump’s claims of a rigged election. It did prove one thing. What many people in this age of rage refuse to admit is that they like it. Rage is addictive.

The targeting of Ginni and Clarence Thomas proved just another exercise in liberal rage

Excerpts:

In the 895-page report, the “curious incident” is the lack of any reference to Ginni Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife. For months, members, the media and an army of pundits hammered away at the “smoking gun” texts Thomas sent to Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows and others calling the election stolen and demanding challenges to certifying the electoral votes.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) was the first member of Congress to call for Justice Thomas to be impeached over his wife’s 29 messages. Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ) called for Thomas to resign immediately as a “corrupt jurist.”

Former Sen. Barbara Boxer and others joined these calls. (Boxer was particularly ironic since she used the same underlying federal law to challenge the certification of George W. Bush’s election.) Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) demanded an investigation. On the committee itself, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) fueled the frenzy and demanded subpoenas for both Thomases.

The media also went into hyperbolic overload. Liberal sites demanded Thomas be impeached, citing “watchdogs” who turned out to be the same crowd that has long denounced the justice.
.
.
.
Yet it turns out what we knew was largely all we needed to know. There was not “much more to the story.” The entire Ginni Thomas scandal merited nary a mention in the massive report.

Indeed, it doesn’t appear the committee had anything more than what we knew when the controversy began. The texts were never denied, and they weren’t surprising since Ginni Thomas was publicly supporting Trump and his claims. She was willing, moreover, to answer the committee’s questions voluntarily.

We’ve 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.

Of course, when some of us suggested Ginni Thomas has a protected right to such views and communications, we were denounced as apologists or sympathizers to an “insurrection.”
.
.
.
That, however, does not change the fact there was nothing in this controversy that warranted the breathless coverage or, in my view, a subpoena issued to the spouse of a sitting justice.
.
.
.
In her testimony, Thomas reiterated under oath that she does not talk to her husband about her political activities and he does not discuss his work on the court. She reaffirmed she never told her husband about her conversations with Meadows.

https://nypost.com/2023/01/03/the-ta...-liberal-rage/