Ginni Thomas agrees to January 6 Committee Interview

Okaaaaaaayyy.

 

Well I'm glad that you agree nobody on the court is unbiased.

 

We are only hearing snippets of what she testified. However, I want her in front of the camera, in front of the committee, and testify to that effect, under oath.

As for delusional, that remains to be seen and only a qualified medical professional should make that claim, not psychological amateurs on this forum.

 

I think it is a fair conclusion for an amateur, but also someone who knows what the word delusional means, to arrive at when this woman still insists the 2020 election was stolen from Trump and repeats that those whom she asserts conspired to cheat her Dear Leader Humpty of that election are being rounded up to be put on barges off Gitmo.

 

There is not one human on this Planet who is not biased to some or absolute degree about something or other.

 

Or to put it another way, I'm glad that you agree that there are left wing Justices on the court who are just as left wing as the right wing Justices are right wing.

 

Please do not attempt to verbal me. I said what I said....not what you said. I may agree with you or I may not ~ but...do not verbal me. I am perfectly able to express myself without the Honorable Member's unnecessary unsought gratuitous assistance.

 

Well if you disagreed, you would have already disagreed. So I just made an assumption, and I think it was pretty safe one.

 

Well! It seems your Dear Leader Humpty's appeal from the decision of the 11th Circuit (on the documents saga) went directly to SCOTUS Justice Thomas, loving pillow talking Husband of this Ginni Thomas. Now, given that AND that Humpty has lauded Ginni for her courage before the Jan 6 Committee and that he even made a point of stating that Ginni was the spouse of Thomas, should not said Thomas now recuse himself from hearing that Appeal?

Down here, it is a matter of 'perception,' not reality, about bias, so I have every confidence that Thomas WILL recuse.

What say ye?

 

You said "YOUR Dear Leader" but you did not address anyone.

 

My mistake. Then, you can take it that my question is addressed to anyone for whom Humpty Trumpty is their Dear Leader.

 

The 'appearance' was created not by Justice Thomas, but by this committee(offense one of many, of this kangaroo committee.). Because of this, the Justice needn't step down nor his impartiality be questioned. Of note, to the surprise of absolutely no one just because Ginni had her opinions, did not mean there was some mysterious elaborate 'plot' by anybody.

Indeed, we should save this post if the justice rules in favor of the DOJ, or more likely I suspect they'll refuse to rule on the case altogether. After all, the SCOTUS only takes cases of significant importance, and the civil case for the documents doesn't even come close.

 

The Committee has not forced, did not force Ginni Thomas to take overt acts to upset the 2020 election outcome with ridiculous claims of fraud, absurd theft of democracy etc etc. As the silent pillow whisperer of she who utters that sort of gibberish, Justice Thomas is impugned by the perception of bias in favour of Humpty, and propriety in any honourable judicial system would demand that he recuse himself from anything coming his way which involves Humpty and his political or personal integrity.

 

She took no such acts, and the committee couldn't even prove that hence the reason for requesting her 'testimony' in the first place.
The committee is abusing its 'authority' in Congress to essentially conduct mock trials and investigations which should be in the charge of the DOJ in the first place.

 

Oh! So you are telling me it is untrue that she had 29 text exchanges with Meadows urging him to assist Humpty remain in the Presidency despite having lost the election? You are telling me it is untrue that she advised Meadows that the Bidens and others involved in the (falsely asserted) conspiracy to steal the 2020 election were being rounded up to be sent to a barge off Gitmo? She did NONE of those overt acts, you say?

 

Sure, but I highly doubt that anyone has referred to Trump as their "Dear Leader."

 

Except you know perfectly well that nobody has referred to Trump as their "Dear Leader."

 

It was stolen from Trump. The FBI coordinated with Social Media to bury Hunter's Laptop which detailed the Biden Crime Family headed by "The Big Guy" who sold his public office for private profit. They failed to fix the 2016 election for Hillary but were able to fix the 2020 election for Biden, after President DeSantis is done with them, they will not be the position where they are able to try to fix any more elections.

After falling into the Ginny-Trap Jan. 6 Committee Admits Abject Defeat With Latest Action

 

There was no crime in the manner in which she was urging them to contest the election. Why is it a concern of this committee? Did she have ANY involvement with ANY of the people who rioted at the Capital and committed crimes there?

What is the LEGISLATIVE purpose of her testimony?

 

The same as the rest of what they do - to distract from the incompetent buffoon currently in office

Oh wait, you said legislative purpose not manipulative..... I got nothing

 

I have no idea whether there was a crime of not in which she was involved. Maybe that is why she was questioned, ey?

 

Invoking the the EVA is not a criminal offense, challenging electors is not a criminal offense has Garland's DOJ charged ANYONE in the White House with a crime for the challenges to electors they planned? And Congress is not suppose to engage in criminal investigations, unconstitutional. That is the job of the DOJ have they charged her with a crime, are they investigating her for a crime?

 

I have no idea what an 'EVA' is. I do know that storming Capitol Hill etc is a crime, and it might be that it is suspected she played some sort of abetting or conspiring role in that. Who knows...hence the questions.

 

The Electoral Vote Act under which Trump was trying to challenge a couple of state's slate of electors. The Dems tried it with him and Bush both times. What criminal involvement with the riot at the Capital are you alleging Thomas and Meadows and what evidence do you have? Who has stated she was involved in any way shape or for with anyone who engaged in violence at the Capital? Why hasn't the Garland DOJ charged them they have been investigating this for almost two years now. We don't even know of any grand jury appearances they have been called to? Here's how it works in my country. The DOJ investigates crimes and charges people. If there is some legislative need concerning those crimes THEN Congress holds hearings with experts to determine what that might be. They DO NOT and under the Constitution CAN NOT engage in criminal investigations of the citizenry.

 

What role she had, if any at all, is a reasonable question for the Jan 6 Committee to ask of her, given the content of the texts she sent to meadows about the election having been stolen etc.