1 1
billvon

"But . . . Hunter's laptop . . . ." (Or - forgiving Thomas and Meadows)

Recommended Posts

Today we discovered that Virginia Thomas, wife of Clarence Thomas, was working to undermine the 2020 election.  She sent 29 texts to Mark Meadows encouraging him to work towards overthrowing the election, and giving him suggestions and support as to how to invalidate the election.  She also attended the Jan 6th insurrection, but has not been charged.

Judges are required to recuse themselves when there is a clear conflict of interest between their spouse's activity and the cases before them.  Clearly Clarence did not.  In fact, in the case before the Supreme Court where Trump was opposing the release of his own presidential records, Clarence was the only dissenting vote - on a case that legal analysts said was a slam dunk; of course a congressional investigation into a president should have access to the official presidential records.  Given his wife's staunch support of Trump, and her efforts to undermine the election, this looks like it is moving from a difference of opinion to a justice with a clear and serious conflict of interest that influenced his decision.

Meanwhile, the person that Virginia Thomas was messaging - Mark Meadows - is having problems of his own.  His wife - Debra Meadows - sent at least two false voter registrations so she (and Mark) could vote in the North Carolina 2020 presidential election.  The registrations claimed that she and her husband lived in a tiny, dilapidated mobile home just over the border from Georgia, a place that investigators says is unoccupied.  Neighbors living next to the trailer said that the Meadows' "did not come. He’s never spent a night in there." 

Per North Carolina law, "fraudulently or falsely completing" a voter registration is a Class I felony.

It should be noted that this is the same Mark Meadows who said "What we do know is a number of times as we have mail-in ballots, if there is not a chain of custody that goes from the voter to the ballot box, mischief can happen." Indeed it can - especially when you and your wife are the ones perpetrating the mischief.

Now, the argument that the right will undoubtedbly make is that these are their spouses, not them, and what their spouse does does not reflect on them.  It will be fun watching them say that, then in the very next breath, say "but Hunter's laptop is PROOF that Biden is crooked!  They are inextricably linked, because Hunter is, you know, his son!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This, to me, is rather large. Had he recused himself, no problem in a lot of ways (yeah in others, but those are mostly ideological, not legal and ethical). But he didn't. Whether he did it because he's a true believer, or because he was protecting his wife's reputation (and therefore his own), it's a direct violation of the separation of the office and the personal, right up there with nepotism. Like, you know, putting your daughter and son-in-law, who have no diplomatic or government experience whatsoever, into senior government posts, with some real power, and saying it's OK because they're not getting paid.

Had there been any evidence of actual pay-for-play with Biden (as opposed to innuendo and "his son"), same thing. But there isn't. There's just a lot of speculation on how a former vice president (i.e. people want to know what he thinks) who's owned housing in a rapidly increasing market and been saving for the last 40+ years, got to be worth 8-9 million. Well, I know other people who are worth in that range, who saved their fucking money for retirement, working normal (though reasonably but not stupidly) well-paying jobs. They're not financial geniuses eihter.

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

This, to me, is rather large. Had he recused himself, no problem in a lot of ways (yeah in others, but those are mostly ideological, not legal and ethical). But he didn't. Whether he did it because he's a true believer, or because he was protecting his wife's reputation (and therefore his own), it's a direct violation of the separation of the office and the personal, right up there with nepotism.

Yes it is and in my opinion Congress should move to impeachment.

However, what we have continuously seen is that especially the Republicans have absolutely no interest to hold "their own" to any account.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carl Nichols, one of Clarence Thomas' clerks was more or less pushed through by Trump to become a judge. He has gone on to write an opinion piece that states intimidating Congress by assaulting the building is not really obstruction of an official proceeding...

Of course it has always been Republicans complaining about "activist judges".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judges!  When you get to someone who is next to unimpeachable, i.e. a judge. Or even a lawyers where lying under oath might get you a fine(Clinton). Theft, well lawyers steal trust funds all the time. The result from the disciplinary committees are costs of the investigation and perhaps a short suspension. Should they be so stupid as to get caught.

The latest tranche of judges from trump is a good example. Any lie to get on the bench. Then away you go with your political "feelings" i.e. Roe v Wade.

The US is no different from anywhere else. The GOP is just better at using the courts for politics. Republicans are silent because its just a judicial lapdog doing what they should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1