Looks like it's Ginni's time in the barrel

[Novara]

“Ginni Thomas corresponded with John Eastman, sources in Jan. 6 House investigation say”

The Washington Post reports: “The committee’s members and staffers are now discussing whether to spend time during their public hearings exploring Ginni Thomas’s role in the attempt to overturn the outcome of the 2020 election, the three people said.”

Perhaps even more significant than showing a correspondence between Ginni Thomas and John Eastman is the detail that documents newly available to the 1/6 Committee provide additional evidence concerning the effort to have state legislatures back rival slates of electors in support of Trump: ‘The meeting agenda indicates that Eastman discussed “State legislative actions that can reverse the media-called election for Joe Biden.”’

She might want to hire a fucking good criminal defense lawyer. Jus' sayin'.

[calguy]

2. Sad, but true

[brush]

3. They both could be in big trouble. She communicted with...

Meadows and Eastman on J6, both involved in the insurrection, and Thomas refused to recuse himself on connected rulings while living with and being intimately involved with someone actively encouraging and involved with insurrection against the US government.

[brush]

8. Chris Hayes and Conway are discussing this very thing...

right now as I'm typing and surmising that it will probably have to be looked at further. Laugh all you want. And let's see if the J6 committee addresses it tomorrow since they saw fit to release the info the she was not only communicating with Meadows, but Eastman too.

[brush]

12. You didn't answer my question.

Do you actually think there will be no legal consequences from all the new revelations coming out of the J6 hearings?

[brush]

25. Please. You openly laughed at me in you first post...

to me. You even wrote that very thing...

"I gotta laugh.

Not to be rude. But, I just gotta laugh."

Now you're talking about being insulted.

God! Some people.

[brush]

9. You actually think nothing at all will result from all these...

Last edited Wed Jun 15, 2022, 09:49 PM - Edit history (1)

new revelations? Sad. I view it differently. But I'm not laughing at you.

[brush]

14. You keep yours up too.

I prefer not to live in cynicism and pessimism.

[brush]

22. This is not Mueller with republicans in charge of everything,

But keep your head up.

[LiberalFighter]

36. Responses like yours don't help.

[ShazzieB]

45. They sure don't.

Negative comments don't help at all, especially when delivered with condescension toward those who have still have the audacity to hope. 😒

Audacity.... hope.... hmm, where have I heard those words used together before? 😉

[CrackityJones75]

52. It is plain as day watching these people on this site.

Amazing that it is allowed really.

But I am sure I will get a reply that they have been on this site since before the internet and they really really are the best democrat forever! Honestly!


I am getting tired of hearing “democrats” telling other democrats to not get their hopes up, stop fooling themselves, etc.

What a joke.

[Trumpdumper]

16. Chin music: You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

What does "garlands dues paying gop" mean? He's a Republican? That will be news to MANY people.

To repeat: You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Trumpdumper]

21. Again, you are completely wrong!

Please provide me one single credible source that identifies him as a Republican. He is nearly always referred to as a "moderate Democrat."

[Trumpdumper]

26. I didn't have to, because I knew the answer, but here you go. Show me the contrary.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/merrick-garland-who-is-he-220865

https://www.quora.com/Is-Merrick-Garland-a-republican-or-a-democrat

[Trumpdumper]

27. "I'm not here to do your research friend" betrays a very limited capacity for debate.

[Trumpdumper]

30. This is not a TOS matter. Please show me one shred of evidence that MG is a Republican.

[Trumpdumper]

33. This is not about opinion. He either is or is not a Republican.

This is a factual discussion. I have shown evidence he's a Democrat, but you, like the Trumpers with their fingers in their ears, simply restate your unsupported rebuttal, having provided no counter evidence.

[FoxNewsSucks]

39. In 2017 Mike Lee suggested MF45 nominate Garland to replace

Comey after the pussygrabber fired him. Filthy hypocrite Lindsey Graham (can't say what makes him a hypocrite as that is considered 'insulting') agreed, saying "he's a great guy".

Why would assholes like Mike Lee & Graham have wanted to see Garland replace Comey?

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senator-pitched-merrick-garland-fbi-director-white-house/story?id=47348732

[Trumpdumper]

40. Post #39 does nothing to advance the argument that Garland is a Republican.

I offered evidence that he's a Democrat. None of the posts since has contradicted that evidence.

[FoxNewsSucks]

44. Republicons like him.

They approve of him. That's damning for me.

So far, he's done little or nothing against the tRump Criminal Empire. If that doesn't change, what will you think?

And why do you think the likes of Mike Lee and Fucking Lindsey Graham would have wanted him as head of MF45's FBI? Because he's a Democrat?

[Trumpdumper]

46. FoxNewsSucks: I would appreciate it if you would give me evidence.

Again: upstream I provided evidence that Garland is a Democrat. Please show me proof he's a Republican.

And did it ever occur to you that if Trump had named Garland FBI director, he then also would have had a vacancy for which he could make an appointment to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals? Lee's and Graham's suggestion makes perfect political sense: it would have removed a Democrat from that bench, to be replaced by a Trump appointee. In addition, the president has the right to fire an FBI director. That's not the case with judges.

[FoxNewsSucks]

67. I didn't claim he was a republicon.

Nor do I know if he's a democrat. Politico is a right-leaning shit-stirring site, with hit-or-miss reliability. The quora link includes answers like this https://qr.ae/pvHlxS and this https://qr.ae/pvHlV0 So that's also not a definitive source.

I don't think Garland is a MAGAt nutbag, but time will soon tell if he's the "good loyal democrat" some want us to think. He's already let too many republicon and tRump criminals walk free.

[geardaddy]

70. They obviously didn't approve of him

when he was nominated for SCOTUS.

[FoxNewsSucks]

71. Actually, they did. Obama asked republicon senators

who on the list of potential nominees would have the greatest republicon support, for an easier less-controversial nomination. Instead of nominating the liberal we want, that's why he picked Garland.

Republicons supported him. It was Moscow Mitch who took the chance to steal that appointment, and block Obama. He even ordered republicon senators to refuse to meet with Garland.

They didn't disapprove, it was just more important to them to steal the seat and fuck Obama.

[emulatorloo]

43. That Garland is a Democratic is not an 'opinion.' It is a fact.

Have a great night. Yes we are all a team here.

[Trumpdumper]

56. The only evidence of his party in this thread was brought by me, showing he's a Democrat ...

Why do you insist on continuing to claim otherwise even though the facts contradict your assertion?

Or is "that would seem to mean he's a D, but, that's not a given" a retreat from your no-doubt-about-it contention earlier that he's an R? -- You wrote "garlands dues paying gop" ... Do you stand by that statement?

[Trumpdumper]

61. Give me a break.

This is not about opinion. This is about an assertion you made that was not couched as "I think ... " or "I believe ... "

When you gratuitously wrote that Garland is a "dues-paying" Republican and lumped him in with known Republicans, that was not expressed as an opinion but as fact. I then countered that mistaken conclusion with a fact. Declining to show me any evidence that would support your original statement, you then told me to "Google it." I did so and provided evidence supporting my statement. You then ignored my evidence and provided none for your case. This is precisely the way a Trumper acts -- no regard or respect for the facts even when they're staring you in the face.

[Trumpdumper]

63. It's not a matter of my happiness ... it's a matter of the careless spreading of nonsense

[Trumpdumper]

65. You backed up what you first claimed as fact with speculation but not a single piece of evidence.

That was markedly different from my approach.

In the future, I would advise not offering your opinion without couching it as such.

Asserting that Garland is a "dues-paying Republican" turned out to be utter conjecture that was masked as gospel.

[LiberalFighter]

37. Why are you pushing misinformation?

[CrackityJones75]

53. Because that is what these guys do!

I am telling you guys start reading their stuff. It is crazy town. All anti-dem enthusiasm all the time. Why? It is crazy.

[progressoid]

47. Yup. n/t

[flying_wahini]

4. She's going to be called to testify sooner or later. Yes, she is protected now but

Eastman’s numerous emails will pull back the veil. She will have to defend herself to save her hubby’s job.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

7. If Ginni Thomas broke Federal Law, her ass is grass, and the DOJ is a lawnmower.

Rest assured Merrick Garland is paying attention no matter who she is married to. For he said "NO ONE is above the law."

[Zeitghost]

55. Maybe

But if he intended to kick the can down the road and not bring politically controversial cases that would be very hard to win, do you think he would come out and say it?

Prosecutors have one answer to those questions; they will always claim to follow the investigation wherever it leads and hold anyone and everyone thought to be guilty of breaking the law accountable regardless of wealth, status or position.

And we all know that from the local DA to the AG that is simply not true, at least not all the time.

[Novara]

13. I don't think it's a coincidence ...

... that there's been a veritable firehose of incriminating stuff being released now.

See, Rs bluff and they accuse Dems of all sorts of absolute lies and bullshit, but Dems don't accuse Rs unless they have the receipts.

Today we learned about Loudermilk's lies about the insurrectionist recon tours, about the "1776" plans, and bout Ginni. It isn't all coincidental. Makes us all lick our chops regarding the next hearing.

If the committee and the DOJ have all this stuff, what else do they have?

Drip ... drip ... drip ...

[tavernier]

17. They reported several times

that they have information that will make our hair stand up on end. I’ve heard a lot of new and interesting information but I think the hair standing up part is yet to come, and my cupboard is full of popcorn.

[wnylib]

68. Maybe they mean the rest of the country

when they speak of hair standing on end. DUers are more aware of info than the average Americsn, so our hair stays put, even as we enjoy seeing the info all brought out for everyone else to see.

And, there have been some interesting revelations that even some of us did not know before the hearings.

[OneGrassRoot]

59. Word...

and Wednesday's hearing postponement makes sense on several fronts now. Let Monday's new info sink in and be discussed in the news cycle, then drop more new HIGHLY incriminating info and make people eager for the next hearing.

Seems to me DOJ, thus far, has been working from the bottom up and the committee is obviously starting at the top with Trump directly in their sights. I hope everyone in the middle is being squeezed and more start turning to spill their guts.

[Novara]

60. Agreed

I think letting us digest (and letting the talking heads talk) about each hearing before the next one is actually a pretty good strategy, if that's what they are doing. Maybe the postponement really has a legitimate reason, but it keeps people talking until the next hearing and gives us time to digest what's already been presented.

AND the J6 committee can drip ... drip ... drip ... more information, which gets us all the more anticipatory for the next hearing. If they're doing this purposefully, it is absolutely brilliant strategy.

It appears that the committee and the DOJ are now in the business of dripping bits and pieces of REALLY incriminating stuff. The net effect is that having all this information come at us from both entities makes it harder for the GQP to rebut it.

And I just keep thinking they must have a TON of stuff in store still. I'm glad I stocked up on popcorn.

[rubbersole]

28. Ginni is in deep shit.

The optics are damning in every way. If she ends up in prison or not (she should), there is no salvaging the Thomas' reputation. Bummer.

[COL Mustard]

31. She might want to hire a fucking good criminal defense lawyer. Jus' sayin'.

Like Eastman? Or Giuliani? I hear they’re available!

[Master_Monstruwacan]

73. Maybe Sydney Powell

will take her case? Heard she could use the work.

[sop]

75. Like Ginni emailed Meadows: Release the Kraken.

[LiberalFighter]

34. I hope you are suggesting her to hire Guiliani.

[Lucinda]

35. ❤️ ✿❧🌿❧✿ ❤️

[Mblaze]

38. Seriously

Who’s going to call an election but the media?

[Blue Owl]

41. Fuckin' finally... throw Long Dong Silver in there with her

[ancianita]

42. Lawrence O'Donnell is leading with Ginni right now!

He says she'd better get a great f'n defense lawyer.

[calimary]

48. She's OWED.

This is LONG overdue. And hopefully getting worse by the day.

[NCLefty]

54. I'll believe she's suffering when I see it.

[Novara]

57. Oh my. The plot thickens

Link to tweet

[twodogsbarking]

69. DU members are a bit testy this day.

[station agent]

72. Can we stop with the barrel

This whole mentality of prison and prosecution being the answer for everything sucks. The system doesn't solve anything.

We just need information. Who gives a shit about revenge. If we know what happened, we can build a better system. Better candidates can use that information to win and get power.

The hateful revenge shit is the path to defeat.

[Joinfortmill]

74. Yup.

[C Moon]

76. I wonder when some of these people will begin falling out of windows.

I guess putin's a little busy dying right now, though.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

77. Jan. 6 committee wants to hear from Ginni Thomas after email revelations

Chairman Bennie Thompson told reporters Thursday that the Jan. 6 committee will "soon" invite Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and an avid Trump supporter, to speak with the panel.

"We think it's time that we would, at some point, invite her to come talk to the committee," Thompson said in the wake of revelations about emails that sources said she exchanged with right-wing lawyer John Eastman, a former clerk to Justice Thomas.

The committee has said Eastman was the mastermind behind the legal scheme to fraudulently overturn the election, in part by pressuring then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject some states' legitimate electoral votes on Jan. 6 when Congress met to certify the election results.

Thompson didn't give any details about public or private testimony and when the committee would make a formal invitation.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jan-6-committee-wants-to-hear-from-ginni-thomas-after-email-revelations/ar-AAYyuQy