Now Reading
WATCH: Here Is Just How Convoluted And Corrupted The Ginni & Clarence Thomas Saga Is

WATCH: Here Is Just How Convoluted And Corrupted The Ginni & Clarence Thomas Saga Is

“Ginni Thomas it the worst of it,” says Texas Paul. In under fifteen minutes, he lays out the case for impeaching Clarence Thomas, including connections and conflicts of interest the average American citizen may have never heard about, unless they’re seriously plugged in to Supreme Court politics.

WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 21: (L-R) Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas sits with his wife and conservative activist Virginia Thomas while he waits to speak at the Heritage Foundation on October 21, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Watch below as Texas Paul runs down a list of jaw-dropping incidents in which Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni have kept a hand directly in politics, despite his moral obligation to remain neutral.

Of course, the most publicized is the election disinformation and attempted insurrection — all of which Ginni Thomas was deeply entwined with, appearing at the Capitol on January 6th 2021, while her husband sat on the Supreme Court bench refusing to recuse himself from cases connected to Capitol violence, despite a clear conflict of interest.

While it’s not the most shocking, the most eye-rolling portion of this is that Justice Thomas had the gall to complain about people “not living with outcomes we don’t like” in reference to protests after the news that SCOTUS would likely overturn Roe v. Wade — while his wife was actually part of the effort to overturn the 2020 election.

Then there are her links to John Eastman — the attorney who wrote a memo explaining how to overturn the election. She even recommended him to Trump!

That’s not all — she’s been involved with the Heritage Foundation and with recommending SCOTUS justices to George W. Bush, while her husband was hearing the Bush v. Gore case — very publicly taking a side on a case her husband was actually judging.

See Also

Then there’s Frank Gaffney, who was paying Ginni Thomas for consulting work when he wrote an amicus brief for a case the Supreme Court — and yes, Justice Thomas — was hearing.

The Thomases have argued that they keep their work separate, and that Ginni certainly has the right to her own political views and affiliations — but ultimately, it’s impossible to listen to these 14 minutes of analysis and still believe the two keep their work separate at all, or that these cases wouldn’t be considered a conflict of interest at any other court level.

What's Your Reaction?
In Love
Not Sure

© 2021 Hillreporter.com

Scroll To Top