January 6th - It's Seditious Conspiracy charge time

wrbtrader said:
We now have a very interesting growing conflict...Supreme Court Justice Thomas wife (Ginni Thomas)...pushed to overturn election results in her communication with Mark Meadows via text messages...

While her husband (Supreme Court Justice Thomas) refuses to recuse himself from any election court cases nor from any cases in the future that his activist wife is actively involved with...the rabbit hole gets deeper.

Just as interesting, the Supreme Court exempted themselves which allows them to decide on court cases involving their own family members unlike the ethical rules for Federal Judges that are not allowed to do such...

What the Fuck !!! :banghead:
  • Reminder - Trump often referred to some of the Supreme Court Justices as "My Court" and he expected allegiance to him. :rolleyes:
  • Another reminder - Justice Clarence Thomas was the only justice to vote for Trump in the first January 6th court case that came before the court. Simply, what influences did his wife have on his court decision ???
America truly does not understand how deep the rabbit hole goes involving the Insurrection on Democracy and on our U.S. Constitution. It will be scary if the January 6th Committee discovers more text that shows the involvement of the Supreme Court Justices themself or in a cover-up to protect the involvement of their loved ones (family members) that had more involvement beyond "text messages". :(

----------

January 6 committee has text messages between Ginni Thomas and Mark Meadows
By Ryan Nobles, Annie Grayer, Zachary Cohen and Jamie Gangel, CNN

Updated 3:54 AM ET, Fri March 25, 2022

(CNN) The House Select Committee investigating the January 6 riot has in its possession more than two dozen text messages, 29 in total, between former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, a conservative activist and the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, according to multiple sources familiar with the messages.

These text messages, according to sources, took place between early November 2020 and mid-January 2021. Thomas recently revealed that she attended the pro-Trump rally that preceded the US Capitol attack on January 6, 2021, but says she "played no role" in planning the events of that day.

The text messages, reviewed by CNN, show Thomas pleading with Meadows to continue the fight to overturn the election results.
  • "Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!! ... You are the leader, with him, who is standing for America's constitutional governance at the precipice. The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History," Thomas wrote on November 10, 2020.
CNN first reported that the text messages were in the committee's possession. The Washington Post first described their content.

Thomas regularly checked in with Meadows to encourage him to push claims of voter fraud and work to prevent the election from being certified. Meadows often responded. On that same day as the previous text, he wrote: "I will stand firm. We will fight until there is no fight left. Our country is too precious to give up on. Thanks for all you do."

On November 24, 2020, Meadows promised he wasn't done battling on then-President Donald Trump's behalf and evoked his faith as a source of strength.

"This is a fight of good versus evil. Evil always looks like the victor until the King of Kings triumphs. Do not grow weary in well doing. The fight continues. I have staked my career on it. Well at least my time in DC on it."
  • Thomas wrote to Meadows on November 19, 2020, "Sounds like Sidney and her team are getting inundated with evidence of fraud. Make a plan. Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down."
Attorney Sidney Powell, who worked on Trump-aligned lawsuits seeking to challenge the results of the 2020 election, was also referred to by herself as "The Kraken" in reference to the ancient mythological sea creature.
  • By the end of November, Thomas was getting increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress of the attempt to find a path to overturn the results.
On November 24, 2020 she wrote: "I can't see Americans swallowing the obvious fraud. Just going with one more thing with no frickin consequences... the whole coup and now this... we just cave to people wanting Biden to be anointed? Many of us can't continue the GOP charade."

The committee is in possession of only one text from the month of January 2021, four days after the riot on Capitol Hill.
  • Thomas wrote to Meadows that she was angry with then-Vice President Mike Pence for not taking the steps necessary to block the certification of the election results.
"We are living through what feels like the end of America. Most of us are disgusted with the VP and are in a listening mode to see where to fight with our teams. Those who attacked the Capitol are not representative of our great teams of patriots for DJT!! Amazing times. The end of Liberty," Thomas wrote.
  • Thomas' messages reflected a belief that the legal challenges presented by a group of conservative lawyers helping the campaign were valid. She attempted to convince Meadows to put his faith in the hands of Powell, who had spent the weeks following the election claiming to have mountains of evidence of fraud that never materialized.
The content of the text messages may be of interest to the committee's investigation, because it asked Meadows in a subpoena to turn over "both documents and your deposition testimony regarding these and other matters that are within the scope of the committee's activity."

The revelation of text messages between Thomas and Meadows, both key allies of Trump, comes as progressives and some legal ethics experts see her activism as a potential conflict of interest for Thomas' work on some Supreme Court cases.
  • Meadows turned over thousands of text messages before he stopped cooperating with the committee. The texts have proven to hold a treasure trove of information about what was going on in the White House in the days leading up to the insurrection, and what people in Trump's orbit were thinking.
The text messages in the committee's possession are only part of the tranche of documents that Meadows provided to the committee during the short period of time he was cooperating with their investigation. They do not necessarily represent the sum total of communication between Thomas and Meadows during that period of time.

There is also the possibility some messages were not turned over due to privilege claims.
Meadows and Thomas are longtime friends, both of whom have been active in conservative causes for decades.

While Thomas has been actively involved in politics, she says she has been careful to distance her activity from her husband.

"But we have our own separate careers, and our own ideas and opinions too. Clarence doesn't discuss his work with me, and I don't involve him in my work," she recently told the Free Beacon.

The work of the January 6 select committee has already come before the Supreme Court. In January, the court did not stand in the way of the release of thousands of documents from the Trump White House despite the former President suing to keep them secret under executive privilege. The vote on the matter was 8-1, with only Thomas dissenting.

CNN reached out to both Meadows' attorney and Thomas directly for comment and have yet to hear back. A spokesperson for the committee declined to comment.

This story has been updated with additional developments Thursday.
----------

wrbtrader
More...

Well Ginni has always been a bit of a nut....

Newly unearthed footage shows Clarence Thomas's wife Ginni Thomas discussing her spiritual struggles after leaving a cult
https://www.businessinsider.com/une...homas-discussing-departure-from-a-cult-2022-4
  • Old video resurfaced of Ginni Thomas discussing her departure from a group called Lifespring.
  • In the video, Thomas discusses leaving the group, which has often been described as a cult.
  • Ginni told The Washington Post in 1987 that she had been disturbed by some of the group's practices.
(More at above url)
 
gwb-trading said:
Well Ginni has always been a bit of a nut....

Newly unearthed footage shows Clarence Thomas's wife Ginni Thomas discussing her spiritual struggles after leaving a cult
https://www.businessinsider.com/une...homas-discussing-departure-from-a-cult-2022-4
  • Old video resurfaced of Ginni Thomas discussing her departure from a group called Lifespring.
  • In the video, Thomas discusses leaving the group, which has often been described as a cult.
  • Ginni told The Washington Post in 1987 that she had been disturbed by some of the group's practices.
(More at above url)
More...

The optics are not very good for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas because of his wife's involvement and communication with some of the main characters like Mark Meadows leading up to the insurrection on January 6th.

Simply, when you see the only dissenting vote being that from Justice Clarence Thomas and the fact that they are allowed to decide on cases that which their own family members are involved...

It makes the Supreme Court decision-making process a joke when any cases involving the insurrection come before the court when they allow Justice Clarence Thomas to vote too while he refuses to recuse himself from the insurrection cases.

In fact, I think the other justices should put pressure on Clarence Thomas to no longer be involved considering his ridiculous only dissenting vote in favor of Trump.

wrbtrader
 
Another January 6 Narrative Goes Boom
Capitol Police did, in fact, let the protesters in the building.

How does a mob “illegally storm” the Capitol building when police let them in? That is the latest narrative-shifting question the media wants desperately to avoid after a federal judge on Wednesday found a January 6 defendant not guilty for his conduct during the protest at the Capitol that day.
Testifying under oath, a U.S. Capitol police official told the court that police indeed had allowed people to enter the building that day

https://amgreatness.com/2022/04/07/another-january-6-narrative-goes-boom/
 
Evidence mounts of GOP involvement in Trump election schemes
https://apnews.com/article/capitol-...mark-meadows-296ddf04ffaacec07f548a2a997af448

Rioters who smashed their way into the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, succeeded — at least temporarily — in delaying the certification of Joe Biden’s election to the White House.

Hours before, Rep. Jim Jordan had been trying to achieve the same thing.

Texting with then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, a close ally and friend, at nearly midnight on Jan. 5, Jordan offered a legal rationale for what President Donald Trump was publicly demanding — that Vice President Mike Pence, in his ceremonial role presiding over the electoral count, somehow assert the authority to reject electors from Biden-won states.

Pence “should call out all electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all,” Jordan wrote.

“I have pushed for this,” Meadows replied. “Not sure it is going to happen.”

The text exchange, in an April 22 court filing from the congressional panel investigating the Jan. 6 riot, is in a batch of startling evidence that shows the deep involvement of some House Republicans in Trump’s desperate attempt to stay in power. A review of the evidence finds new details about how, long before the attack on the Capitol unfolded, several GOP lawmakers were participating directly in Trump’s campaign to reverse the results of a free and fair election.

It’s a connection that members of the House Jan. 6 committee are making explicit as they prepare to launch public hearings in June. The Republicans plotting with Trump and the rioters who attacked the Capitol were aligned in their goals, if not the mob’s violent tactics, creating a convergence that nearly upended the nation’s peaceful transfer of power.

“It appears that a significant number of House members and a few senators had more than just a passing role in what went on,” Rep. Bennie Thompson, the Democratic chairman of the Jan. 6 committee, told The Associated Press last week.

Since launching its investigation last summer, the Jan. 6 panel has been slowly gaining new details about what lawmakers said and did in the weeks before the insurrection. Members have asked three GOP lawmakers — Jordan of Ohio, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California — to testify voluntarily. All have refused. Other lawmakers could be called in the coming days.

So far, the Jan. 6 committee has refrained from issuing subpoenas to lawmakers, fearing the repercussions of such an extraordinary step. But the lack of cooperation from lawmakers hasn’t prevented the panel from obtaining new information about their actions.

The latest court document, submitted in response to a lawsuit from Meadows, contained excerpts from just a handful of the more than 930 interviews the Jan. 6 panel has conducted. It includes information on several high-level meetings nearly a dozen House Republicans attended where Trump’s allies flirted with ways to give him another term.

Among the ideas: naming fake slates of electors in seven swing states, declaring martial law and seizing voting machines.

The efforts started in the weeks after The Associated Press declared Biden president-elect.

In early December 2020, several lawmakers attended a meeting in the White House counsel’s office where attorneys for the president advised them that a plan to put up an alternate slate of electors declaring Trump the winner was not “legally sound.” One lawmaker, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, pushed back on that position. So did GOP Reps. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Louie Gohmert of Texas, according to testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former special assistant in the Trump White House.

Despite the warning from the counsel’s office, Trump’s allies moved forward. On Dec. 14, 2020, as rightly chosen Democratic electors in seven states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — met at their seat of state government to cast their votes, the fake electors gathered as well.

They declared themselves the rightful electors and submitted false Electoral College certificates declaring Trump the true winner of the presidential election in their states.

Those certificates from the “alternate electors” were then sent to Congress, where they were ignored.

The majority of the lawmakers have since denied their involvement in these efforts.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia testified in a hearing in April that she does not recall conversations she had with the White House or the texts she sent to Meadows about Trump invoking martial law.

Gohmert told AP he also does not recall being involved and that he is not sure he could be helpful to the committee’s investigation. Rep. Jody Hice of Georgia played down his actions, saying it is routine for members of the president’s party to be going in and out of the White House to speak about a number of topics. Hice is now running for secretary of state in Georgia, a position responsible for the state’s elections.

Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona didn’t deny his public efforts to challenge the election results but called recent reports about his deep involvement untrue.

In a statement Saturday, Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona reiterated his “serious” concerns about the 2020 election. “Discussions about the Electoral Count Act were appropriate, necessary and warranted,” he added.

Requests for comment from the other lawmakers were not immediately returned.

Less than a week later after the early December meeting at the White House, another plan emerged. In a meeting with House Freedom Caucus members and Trump White House officials, the discussion turned to the decisive action they believed that Pence could take on Jan. 6.

Those in attendance virtually and in-person, according to committee testimony, were Hice, Biggs, Gosar, Reps. Perry, Gaetz, Jordan, Gohmert, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Debbie Lesko of Arizona, and Greene, then a congresswoman-elect.

“What was the conversation like?” the committee asked Hutchinson, who was a frequent presence in the meetings that took place in December 2020 and January 2021.

“They felt that he had the authority to, pardon me if my phrasing isn’t correct on this, but — send votes back to the States or the electors back to the states,” Hutchinson said, referring to Pence.

When asked if any of the lawmakers disagreed with the idea that the vice president had such authority, Hutchinson said there was no objection from any of the Republican lawmakers.

In another meeting about Pence’s potential role, Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis were joined again by Perry and Jordan as well as Greene and Lauren Boebert, a Republican who had also just been elected to the House from Colorado.

Communication between lawmakers and the White House didn’t let up as Jan. 6 drew closer. The day after Christmas — more than two months after the election was called for Biden — Perry texted Meadows with a countdown.

“11 days to 1/6 and 25 days to inauguration,” the text read. “We gotta get going!” Perry urged Meadows to call Jeffrey Clark, an assistant attorney general who championed Trump’s efforts to challenge the election results. Perry has acknowledged introducing Clark to Trump.

Clark clashed with Justice Department superiors over his plan to send a letter to Georgia and other battleground states questioning the election results and urging their state legislatures to investigate. It all culminated in a dramatic White House meeting at which Trump considered elevating Clark to attorney general, only to back down after top Justice Department officials made clear they would resign.

Pressure from lawmakers and the White House on the Justice Department is among several areas of inquiry in the Jan. 6 investigation. Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democratic member of the panel from Maryland, has hinted there are more revelations to come.

“As the mob smashed our windows, bloodied our police and stormed the Capitol, Trump and his accomplices plotted to destroy Biden’s majority in the electoral college and overthrow our constitutional order,” Raskin tweeted last week.

When the results of the panel’s investigation come out, Raskin predicted, “America will see how the coup and insurrection converged.”
 
Regardless of what you think of Jan 6th (and i'm not on record with any viewpoint anywhere here, so feel free to go looking if you want) I can assure you this:

If you are liberal (like the NPC above) you will likely not consider it the same thing when public figures call for a "fight" based on Row v. Wade preliminary drafts, or how people are trying to intimidate justices at their homes. Nah, that's just fine.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1523844511658647553
 
Tsing Tao said:
Regardless of what you think of Jan 6th (and i'm not on record with any viewpoint anywhere here, so feel free to go looking if you want) I can assure you this:

If you are liberal (like the NPC above) you will likely not consider it the same thing when public figures call for a "fight" based on Row v. Wade preliminary drafts, or how people are trying to intimidate justices at their homes. Nah, that's just fine.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1523844511658647553
More...

Let me state --- that I have stated many times that protestors should not be allowed to intimidate or protest outside the homes of public officials. Just how many times do I need to state this before it sinks into your thick skull so you stop constantly misrepresenting my positions which are obviously documented over a long period time.
 
gwb-trading said:
Let me state --- that I have stated many times that protestors should not be allowed to intimidate or protest outside the homes of public officials. Just how many times do I need to state this before it sinks into your thick skull so you stop constantly misrepresenting my positions which are obviously documented over a long period time.
More...

So do you equate the comments and actions of the left in the last week or so with the Jan 6th event in terms of the same?
 
Tsing Tao said:
So do you equate the comments and actions of the left in the last week or so with the Jan 6th event in terms of the same?
More...

You actually equate a violent invasion of Congress by a mob as the equivalent of a group peacefully protesting outside the homes of Supreme Court justices?

There is a huge difference in the degree of severity between January 6th and peaceful protests.

However I believe that neither a violent invasion of Congress should be allowed, nor protests outside the private residences of public officials.
 
gwb-trading said:
You actually equate a violent invasion of Congress by a mob as the equivalent of a group peacefully protesting outside the homes of Supreme Court justices?

There is a huge difference in the degree of severity between January 6th and peaceful protests.

However I believe that neither a violent invasion of Congress should be allowed, nor protests outside the private residences of public officials.
More...

Ok, so its all peaceful. No threats, no violence or threats of violence of any kind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top