House panel to explore impeachment, judicial ethics in wake of Ginni Thomas texts

[brooklynite]

Source: The Hill

House Democrats on Wednesday will hold a hearing on Supreme Court ethics and the possibility of impeaching justices, a move that follows the revelation of controversial text messages from Ginni Thomas, the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas.

The texts from Ginni Thomas to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows about the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot have set off a political firestorm in Washington, raising Democratic anger and calls for Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from decisions related to the election and former President Trump.

Republicans overwhelmingly have rallied to Clarence Thomas’s defense.

A memo from Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), the chairman of the House Judiciary courts subcommittee, distributed to members ahead of Wednesday’s hearing, and obtained by The Hill, explores codes of conduct for federal judges outside the Supreme Court and summarizes legislative proposals to impose ethics requirements on Supreme Court justices.

Read more: https://thehill.com/news/house/3466200-house-panel-to-explore-impeachment-judicial-ethics-in-wake-of-ginni-thomas-texts/

[DURHAM D]

1. Yes

[Thomas Hurt]

2. Sheesh people what is the point of holding office if not to corruptly influence laws and policy...

for the benefit of yourself, your family and party.

[erronis]

30. Oh, come on now. Lots of honest and good people want to hold office.

But many of them get corrupted in the process of winning and are further corrupted by holding power.

Not too many pure angels or altruists in government.

[MerryHolidays]

3. As the "illustrious" Gerald Ford said

in 1970 as the then House Minority Leader when trying to impeach Justice William O. Douglas, at Richard Nixon's request:

In the end, Ford, who would come to know better than any elected official the arguments about what constitutes an “impeachable offense,” gave his guidance. “The only honest answer,” he contended, “is that an im­peachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history; con­viction results from whatever offense or offenses two-thirds of the other body considers to be sufficiently serious to re­quire removal of the accused from office.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/02/19/barbara-jordan-supreme-court/?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_30

To quote the great Justice Douglas himself: "Sunlight is the best disinfectant". The American people must know EXACTLY what happened with Clarence Thomas and Ginni Thomas. Even if it doesn't lead to impeachment/conviction, we have the RIGHT to know.

Period. End of discussion.

[Rhiannon12866]

4. +1000!

[MontanaMama]

5. Jeez Louise. Finally.

[wnylib]

6. I would love to see Clarence Thomas

Last edited Wed Apr 27, 2022, 05:07 PM - Edit history (1)

removed from the court. But it will not happen.

It would be a waste of time and energy to pursue impeachment since there isn't even a snowball's chance in Hell of conviction.

[MerryHolidays]

7. Let the facts come out

This would be a nice set piece in conjunction with the J6 hearings: "The Ballad of Clarence and Ginni", to paraphrase the Beatles, would be quite interesting.

"Somehow", I think they're related....

[The Grand Illuminist]

8. +100

[agingdem]

12. Chief Justice Roberts should be proud..

under his watchful eye his court has turned into a joke, more night court than high court.....that a House Judiciary subcommittee is holding hearings reviewing high court judicial conduct should shame Roberts to the core..three Trump appointed incompetents, an angry Sam Alito pissed at the Courts decision to slap down a pro Trump lawsuit, and Clarence Thomas knee deep in the in the near shredding of the Constitution via his batshit crazy wife...Robert's Kangaroo Court..now that's a legacy

[Fiendish Thingy]

14. Clarence won't be removed, but Ginni could lose *her* power

A deep, thorough Benghazi-style investigation could make Ginni so radioactive that nobody will be seen with her or take her calls.

[ShazzieB]

16. Ooh!

I'll take a large serving of that, with a side of holding Clarence's feet to the fire. Well done, please!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

34. Or it may increase her Republican "creds".

Look, they're persecuting little ol' me for being a true American.

[Emile]

18. Wow, a waste of time!

[msfiddlestix]

22. I don't see it as waste of time..

I infer you're thinking of the Senate, how it will obviously never vote to remove Thomas from the court, in that it requires a 2/3rds agreement.

But I do believe in the importance of calling out the Supreme Court's lack of ethical propriety (to put it mildly) congressionally.

[Emile]

23. Uhh I don't either! I was posting in response to another poster.

[msfiddlestix]

24. oh. sorry. I didn't see that.

[wnylib]

25. Doesn't take an impeachment

to do that. Just let a House committee investigate and report their findings. If the media or general public ask why he is not impeached for what the committee finds, just tell the truth, that there is no chance of a conviction because of support for him in the Senate.

Let the public know 1) the details about Thomas, and 2) the extent of Republican corruption that makes it impossible to remove corrupt officials in government.

[wnylib]

26. Yes, since it will not accomplish anything.

See my #25.

[Hotler]

27. At the very least some sunshine is shown on them and they are made to feel

uneasy and uncomfortable. Make them sweat, make them squirm.

[Smackdown2019]

28. Only way I see

Only way I see it happen is if Trump eats too many big macs to end this obsession the right-wing nutz have over this Baffon!

[Hekate]

9. Yes!

[calimary]

10. YES!!! YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!

Better get it done while Dems hold the House, though! NO FOOT-DRAGGING OR HAIR-SPLITTING, DAMMIT!!!!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

11. Kudos to some who at least try.

[Bev54]

13. While they are at it maybe they could also investigate who paid Kavanaugh's debts.

[tishaLA]

15. Any legislative solution will face-off against right wing activists

On SCOTUS and they'll do a little legislating from the bench to protect themselves.

[DENVERPOPS]

17. Nothing will happen............

This is by far, the most thoroughly corrupt Political Party and corrupted USSC in the history of our nation......

[bucolic_frolic]

19. Democrats, the script isn't written for you. You need to Mitch the Constitution and find powers

you didn't think were there. THINK! Hard!

[Novara]

20. There won't be any "legislative solution"

This is all for show. But I am all for it. It shines a light on some of the rot in the SCOTUS. Hopefully the Dems keep the House. If not, this panel's time is very limited.

But wait - the panel will come to the conclusion that impeachment is off the table but a code of ethics should be instituted. Then let's see all the Rs in Congress argue against a code of ethics. All of the republicans are a goddamned corrupt joke. And I wish to fuck that America would wake up and clean house. But hell, with voting rights being smashed, it looks like we're fucked thoroughly.

I really feel sorry for the Dem-appointed justices, as they are the only SCOTUS justices who are qualified and have integrity. The rest of 'em are political hacks doing the right wing's bidding. This current court is a joke.

Think about it - in lower courts, judges recuse themselves if there's even a hint of a conflict of interest. It's clear that this court doesn't have the integrity to do that unless it's cemented in a code of ethics. Roberts should have insisted Thomas recuse himself before they took any cases regarding the last administration and the insurrection. Hell, Thomas should have done it on his own, but when he didn't, Roberts should have insisted. But neither of them has an ounce of integrity.

Yes, chief justice Roberts - your court is a fucking joke. THAT will be your legacy, if you give a shit.

[Raven123]

21. Perhaps they could pass legislation drawing some red lines on what is impeachable

[jmowreader]

29. You know the problem with that

The Democrats would have this big list of serious crimes. The Republicans would only have “being a Democrat.”

[calimary]

31. I hope they do more than just "explore."

[Catherine Vincent]

32. Well it's about time

[cstanleytech]

33. What really needs to happen with the Jan. 6th thing is a Special Counsel should be setup that

has the broad power to investigate every aspect of what happened from the ones that stormed the capital to the ones that assisted them including any member of the House, Senate and the Supreme Court.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

35. Clarence Thomas will frame this as a "lynching".

Just like he did during his confirmation performance.