Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court justice, says she attended Jan. 6 'Stop-the-Steal' rally ...

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Source: Washington Post

Politics

Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court justice, says she attended Jan. 6 ‘Stop-the-Steal’ rally before Capitol attack

Thomas, the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas, said she left the rally before former president Donald Trump took the stage

By Mariana Alfaro
Today at 12:46 p.m. EDT

Virginia Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, for the first time has publicly acknowledged that she participated in the Jan. 6, 2021 “Stop-the-Steal” rally on the Ellipse that preceded the storming of the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob, raising questions about the impartiality of her husband’s work.

In an interview with the conservative outlet the Washington Free Beacon that was published Monday, Thomas, who goes by Ginni, said she was part of the crowd that gathered at the Ellipse that morning to support President Donald Trump. Trump was claiming falsely that widespread voter fraud delivered the presidency to Democrat Joe Biden — a falsehood he continues to repeat.

Thomas said she was at the rally for a short period of time, got cold and went home before Trump took the stage at noon that day.

{snip}

By Mariana Alfaro
Mariana Alfaro is a reporter for The Washington Post's breaking political news team. The El Salvador native joined The Post in 2019 as a researcher for the Daily 202, our flagship politics newsletter. Before that, Mariana interned at the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Insider, and The Texas Tribune. Twitter https://twitter.com/marianaa_alfaro

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/14/ginni-thomas-jan-6-rally-capitol-attack/

---

I've seen the story elsewhere, but not with a reliable source.

-- -- -- -- -- --

I've said this before, and I'm standing by my remarks. The rally at the Ellipse on the morning of January 6, 2020, was a Constitutionally-protected exercise. People at that rally were peaceably assembling. They stood out in the cold, they waved banners, they listened to speakers - nothing illegal about that.

After the event, may people walked along the Mall headed for the Capitol. And? I've done that. Also legal.

The attack on the Capitol was a separate event. Once the police lines were crossed and the assault on members of law enforcement began, the assembly became a different thing entirely.

Before you start screaming, "lock her up," ask yourselves, "what for?" What law did she break? Actual code is what counts, not your feelings.

[exboyfil]

1. Can they put her in the room

where they decided shutting down the vote would allow separate sets of electors to be brought into consideration. If so then she is part of the conspiracy. The conspiracy included using criminal means to prevent a Constitutionally defined activity.

Trump's attorney outlines the plot quite well. It is a conspiracy.

[Botany]

5. Peter Navarro admitted to the conspiracy, "the Green Bay Sweep."

https://www.newspressnow.com/news/national_news/election2020/trump-adviser-peter-navarro-skips-scheduled-deposition-with-january-6-committee/article_a82d0bae-0a7f-5825-964b-e28c78f366cc.html

[olegramps]

40. Firstly, Thomas should have never been confirmed. He and his wife are a disgrace.

He is nothing more than a foul mouth two-bit judge that was allowed to sexual harass women on the job. Filthy bastard at best and his wife is even worse.

But what can you expect they are Republicans? Every Republican administration dating from Nixon has been rocked with scandal. Hundreds of indictments and convictions. Compare that to Democrats that have seen very few and only really minor officials charged. Compare Obama's administration that absolutely no one charged with any offences. Trump's will set record even surpassing Nixon's. Their party is rotten to the core and the scum of the earth. Liars and cheaters who will do anything to get elected. You could put all the integrity of the Republicans and put in a nit's navel and have room left for their compassion.

[dem4decades]

2. Time for a subpoena for Ginni, has a SC Justice wife ever taken the 5th?

[Walleye]

10. Yep. Haul her ass in front of the committee

[4Q2u2]

3. Let's all say it together now.

LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!

[ananda]

14. Agree.

For sedition and insurrection.

[NQAS]

4. Sounds like a challenge

I (grudgingly) agree that until the attack, the rally was (probably) protected by the first amendment. But this woman was not your ordinary rally goer and so warrants more scrutiny. So, video sleuths, have at it. Was she telling the truth?

And I'll echo another poster who asks if she attended any of the coup planning sessions. As the traitor on Fox says, I'm only asking the question.

[llashram]

6. ms Thomas

had probably already met with First Traitor trump. She probably didn't want to stay because she already knew what was going to transpire...

[Phoenix61]

7. I think the issue is she is the spouse of a USSC justice

pushing the propaganda that the election was stolen. And yes, she’s an individual who has the same 1st amendment rights as anyone else. However, the only reason anyone is shoving a mic in her face is because she is the spouse of a USSC justice.

[Achilleaze]

12. There you have it. SHE'S AN ADVOCATE FOR ISSUES BEFORE THE COURT

She may not have broken a "law" precisely, but she compromised the bejabbers out of her already deeply suspect Republican hubby, dear twisted Clarence.

This cannot stand. He cannot pretend to be an "impartial" judge. She and he are compromised - reeking to Hell and back like long-neglected stinkfish on a bench. He must resign. Now.

[Initech]

8. Tratior!!!!

[Evolve Dammit]

9. I'd be interested in phone/ computer records. Up to her eyeballs is my suspicion.

[jayschool2013]

11. This comment

Ginni: "Hi, Clarence. I'm home!"
Clarence: "How was your day, dear?"
Ginni: "Great! Tried to destroy democracy! How about you?"
Clarence: "Same here."

[Hassler]

13. Lock. Her. Up. And her creepy husband too.

[Slammer]

15. Thomas

I do think that this helps point out the need for a code of ethics for the members of the Supreme Court to set out how they handle speaking fees, who they can accept speaking fees from, and when to recuse themselves from cases because of conflicts of interest.

I don't have a problem with his wife being a political activist.

I do have a problem with Justice Thomas ruling on cases where his wife has been part of the political activism.

====

"After the event, may people walked along the Mall headed for the Capitol. And? I've done that. Also legal. The attack on the Capitol was a separate event. Once the police lines were crossed and the assault on members of law enforcement began, the assembly became a different thing entirely."

It became a different thing before that.
https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/federal-crimes-trespass-on-the-u-s-capitol.html

Trespassing and Unlawful Activities at the U.S. Capitol
18 U.S.C. § 1752; 40 U.S.C. §§ 5104, 5109

A person who knowingly commits the following acts faces up to six months' imprisonment and a $5,000 fine:

1) enters or remains on the floor or in the gallery of the U.S. Senate or House chambers without authorization
2) obstructs or impedes passage through or within the Capitol building or grounds
3) parades, pickets, or demonstrates in a Capitol building
4) damages or destroys property in Capitol buildings or on Capitol grounds, or
5) assaults an individual in a Capitol building or on Capitol grounds.

(So being part of a group which impedes movement through the Capitol grounds is a crime, even if nothing else had been done.)

Obstruction of Duties Performed by Capitol Police
2 U.S.C. §§ 1961, 1966

Any person who knowingly and willfully obstructs, resists, or interferes with a member of the Capitol Police engaged in their duties commits a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one years' imprisonment and a $300 fine.

(Impeding the passage of police officers so they can't get to the places where they need to in order to do their job would certainly apply here.)


Obstruction of Congressional Proceedings
18 U.S.C. §§ 1505, 2331

Misdemeanor penalties apply to acts that intentionally disrupt Congressional business on the House or Senate floor or in any committee or hearing held by either or both chambers. Such acts include unauthorized entry or trespass within the Capitol buildings, as well as engaging in loud, threatening, disruptive, or abusive language or conduct. A conviction can result in up to six months' imprisonment.

A person who corruptly or by threats or force obstructs or impedes a Congressional proceeding faces up to five years in prison. If the act involved domestic terrorism (acts that appear to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion), the penalty increases to an eight-year felony and up to a $250,000 fine.

(Since the intent of the group trespass was to obstruct Congressional Proceedings, each and every person of the 4000+ trespassers could credibly be charged with this one as well...even though prosecutors have been reluctant to go after this one in each case.)

[barbaraann]

16. She's a lawyer. She knows exactly what is a statutory offense and what isn't. n/t

[msfiddlestix]

17. I agree with you on the merits of the argument, I just don't believe she's telling the truth.

She merely attended a rally and then went home cuz she was cold.

That part I don't believe is the total sum of her involvement. It maybe the total sum of her physical involvement that day, but um financing and planning the logistical operations of the actual insurrection at the Capitol should still be under legal scrutiny.

And yes, her husband should be recused from any case that should come up connected to the insurrection. IMO.

But I know that ain't gonna happen. Even if she literally rode in a horse leading the charge, she wouldn't be held to account nor would her husband be forced to recuse.

Because no one (other than the blind followers) is going to be held to account I don't give an effin hell what our tag team of legal officials here say. none of them will be held to account.

[Slammer]

19. weather

Okay she's 65 years old.

It was 42 degrees outside in DC at the time of the rally.

I'm not inclined to believe her on general principles. But I know a ton of people her age who would be frozen into a block of ice if they stood outside a couple of hours in 42 degree weather.

And particularly if she felt the need to dress up for the occasion and was wearing a dress or skirt rather than being sensibly bundled up.

(I used to run around in shorts and a short sleeve shirt for hours at a time in 42 degree weather. Then my body flipped a switch one year and now I'm freezing if it's 66 degrees.)

< insert obligatory Bernie-with-mittens picture >

[msfiddlestix]

26. I live in Northern California... our coldest days tend to be in the mid 50's..

We consider that chilly.. we tend to always dress in layers all year round, except during heat waves, because even in the summer we tend to have chilly nights. In the winter our layers consist of thermal underwear or equivalent. Leggings and such are my norm. keeps me quite comfortable. I'm over 70, I tend to feel the climate as had in my younger days.

it maybe that she's so pampered as to not have be out in the elements.

But here's the thing, she doesn't have to be in the mix physically to be involved. I believe she financed and organized the logistics (via funding organization she created) at the very least.

That makes her directly involved.

[live love laugh]

18. Didn't she fund insurrectionists?

[msfiddlestix]

27. yes she did. n/t

[Jetheels]

20. How can a Supreme Court justice maintain impartiality when his wife is taking part in a rally to

overthrow the government? He needs to resign. Lock her up.
Can you imagine if a democrat (fill in the blank), you’d never here the end of it.

[Kid Berwyn]

36. Thank you!

Horny hubby will not recuse himself from matters involving his wife and her fascist politics.

[Ford_Prefect]

21. She was a key player in organizing and funding the event during the run up to Jan.6th

"Thomas said she was at the rally for a short period of time, got cold and went home before Trump took the stage at noon that day." Sounds like a whiny excuse by a professional bully to me.

IMO she wanted to be officially elsewhere when things went down. She pours gasoline on the fire but always from a discrete distance.

[BlueIdaho]

22. I'm all for women having a career

But destroying the government is off limits.

[GB_RN]

23. Yes, The Rally Itself May Be Protected Speech...

But ETHICALLY, Ginny Thomas had no fucking business being within 100 miles of the damned thing. She already is involved in too much shady shit that touches her husband and the rest of the SCOTUS. The wife of a judge, much less a SCOTUS (In)justice should fucking know better.

[JohnnyRingo]

24. That means her husband believes the election was stolen.

Spouses have a profound influence over their mate, they often finish each other's sentences.
"Ginny, on your way home from the store, I want you to stop..."
"The steal!!"

Retirement one way or the other is the only way this will end well.
Expect heavy partisanship as that ominous date nears.

[GB_RN]

25. Ironically (Or Maybe Not)...

(In)Justice Clarence "Uncle Slappy" Thomas (R-No Questions Allowed) gave a speech the other day decrying the politicization of the court and warning of political activities that could delegitimize it (meaning expanding the number of justices).

He really should go around wearing clown makeup.

[NH Ethylene]

28. He should not be allowed to rule on any matter that relates to his wife's activities.

That's it. Nobody should be locked up unless there is evidence of actual wrongdoing. And Thomas, though I loathe him, should not be otherwise penalized for his wife's activism.

Would we all like to be held account for the actions and beliefs of our spouses? We should not be pushing for consequences that we would not want Dems held to as well.

[agingdem]

31. If he had an ounce of integrity he would resign..

not recuse but flat out resign...he is compromised (as if he never was before)...and in this case, yes he should be held accountable for his wife's actions because she is a QAnon insurrectionist, someone who has no problem shredding the Constitution, the same Constitution her asshole of a husband swore to uphold...

[NH Ethylene]

33. So if your spouse turned out to be a murderer, should you be held accountable?

Only if you are complicit. Otherwise, you are not liable for his actions.

Clarence Thomas may be complicit in his wife's activities, which would make him ineligible to be on the Supreme Court (I would think!), but so far there is no evidence to support that.

Women are no longer possessions of their husbands. Women can and do lead lives that are independent of their marriage. It bothers me when people talk about her as though she is controlled by her husband.

[agingdem]

34. Thomas is complicit...

he has ties to dark money and right wing activist groups...

[NH Ethylene]

35. If that is the case, then the thread should be about him, not his wife's activities. n/t

[L. Coyote]

29. "... we don't launch or attend insurrections."

Link to tweet

[dlk]

30. Didn't Ginny also personally fund some of the buses transporting insurrectionists?

Scratch the surface and I’m guessing there’s a lot of dirt there.

[Ponietz]

32. Read this:

Link to tweet

Also, Rolling Stone reported on February 4th that Ginni sent an email saying Clarence and DeSantis were communicating.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/clarence-thomas-ron-desantis-communication-new-emails-1295354

[Jetheels]

37. Clearly a conflict of interest.

[Ponietz]

39. More than that -- prima facie evidence of conspiracy and fraud

Last edited Tue Mar 15, 2022, 06:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Thomas had an overwhelming responsibility to recuse himself from any case in which his wife is a witness or suspect. He failed to notify the parties in the case and acted on the merits before him anyway—judicial malfeasance.

[samsingh]

38. i wonder how many roads connect traitor ginni to putin