Clarence Thomas’ wife angry at Pence for not rejecting 2020 election results
11 responses | 0 likes
Started by WxFollower - March 25, 2022, 11:37 a.m.

This is batshoot craziness!

“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.


“Ms Thomas called Joe Biden's victory ‘the greatest heist of our history’.”

“‘Sounds like Sidney and her team are getting inundated with evidence of fraud,’ Ms Thomas wrote. ‘Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down.’”


Mike Pence is a patriot. If anyone disagrees, why is that the case?

By metmike - March 25, 2022, 12:06 p.m.
Like Reply


Thanks so much for bringing this to our attention. I'm with 96 year old dad, in Detroit for a couple more days and especially appreciate it from my current locatio.

Agree that this is mind boggling crazy to think that the wife of a Supreme Court justice feels so extremely strong about this. 

The question is...............if she is expressing herself, using these views with gusto to others that know who she much impact does that have?

And also, how could a marriage work if her husband was completely opposed to this line of thinking (which he should be)?

It's possible that her husband is completely attached and doesn't think that way. My guess, based on being married is that he very likely aligns with some of this ideology or that marriage might be pretty dysfunctional. 

You showed how he voted on this topic, in opposition of the other judges. This is the most powerful evidence of all to tell us whats going on in his mind.

By metmike - March 25, 2022, 12:11 p.m.
Like Reply

In a way, this just reinforces the importance that each party places on appointing Supreme Court justices.

They ALWAYS pick judges that have ruled in favor of their ideologies. Thomas has always been seen as an extreme version of that but this is nuts.

Clarence Thomas (born June 23, 1948) is an American lawyer who serves as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He was nominated by President George H. W. Bush to succeed Thurgood Marshall, and has served since 1991. Thomas is the second African-American to serve on the Court, after Marshall. Since 2018, Thomas has been the senior associate justice, the longest-serving member of the Court, with a tenure of 30 years, 153 days as of March 25, 2022.

Thomas grew up in Savannah, Georgia, and was educated at the College of the Holy Cross and Yale Law School. He was appointed an assistant attorney general in Missouri in 1974, and later entered private practice there. In 1979, he became a legislative assistant to United States Senator John Danforth, and in 1981 he was appointed Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education. In 1982, President Ronald Reagan appointed Thomas Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

In 1990, President George H. W. Bush nominated Thomas to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He served in that role for 16 months before filling Marshall's seat on the Supreme Court. Thomas's confirmation hearings were bitter and intensely fought, centering on an accusation that he had sexually harassed attorney Anita Hill, a subordinate at the Department of Education and the EEOC. Hill claimed that Thomas made multiple sexual and romantic overtures to her despite her repeatedly telling him to stop. Thomas and his supporters asserted that Hill, as well as the witnesses on her behalf and supporters, had fabricated the allegations to prevent the appointment of a black conservative to the Court. The Senate confirmed Thomas by a vote of 52–48.[1]

Supreme Court experts describe Thomas's jurisprudence as textualist, stressing the original meaning of the United States Constitution and statutes. He is also an advocate of natural law.[2] Many writers and political scientists view Thomas as the Court's most conservative member.[3][4][5][6][7] He is also known for having gone over a decade without asking a question during oral arguments

By mcfarm - March 26, 2022, 7:41 a.m.
Like Reply

want to make sure I am clear on this. You guys are talking batshit about the spouse. Where in the hell was batshit when we had a sitting justice {Ginsberg} yapping like the crazy batshit person she was about the sitting President of the United States? And to think we will shortly be  yearning for the days of Ginsberg and breyer when this even less qualified and way more batshit crazy brown takes her seat and starts with "I don't know what a women is"

By metmike - March 26, 2022, 8:53 p.m.
Like Reply


Those are 2 different people and 2 different events/situations that are completely unrelated.

Is this supposed to be justification for the Clarence Thomas/wife situation?

So anytime a person from  the party we affiliate with does something questionable, we justify it by pointing to something somebody from the other party did in the past that we didn't like?

By WxFollower - March 26, 2022, 9:16 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks mc and Mike.

 mc, Mike, and others, do you think Pence is a patriot for not falling to the pressure of not certifying the 2020 election results?

By mcfarm - March 27, 2022, 7:31 a.m.
Like Reply

so you are saying you "enjoyed" {because ofcouse it was about Trump} when a sitting supreme "Ginsberg" went totally off the rails and critiqued a sitting President, his personal and professional life? Wow, wonder how that would of come cross had Trump pulled the same with batshit crazy Ginsberg? And yes in my opinion what she did crossed several lines of behavior, ventured into the political world where a justice should never go and then happily granted news interviews about such matters. What she did far outweighed what a spouse is allowed to do as they do have constitutional rights no matter who they are married to.

Pence in his own mind followed his conscience. He made a very difficult decision. Many court cases in the states in question were not handled well at all but Republicans usually do what's best for the country and do not prolong the fight.

By metmike - March 27, 2022, 11:15 a.m.
Like Reply

"so you are saying you "enjoyed" {because ofcouse it was about Trump} when a sitting supreme "Ginsberg" went totally off the rails and critiqued a sitting President, his personal and professional life?"


You totally made that up, man!

There's no point in continuing a conversation with a person that  makes up the opinion of somebody they disagree with so that they can attack it. Instead of engaging or even defending a position with such a person, the best thing just analyze them because the strawman argument is used by people that are usually not capable of actually comprehending the other person's point.

A common form of setting up such a straw man is by use of the notorious formula "so what you're saying is ..... ?", converting the argument to be challenged into an obviously absurd distortion. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

By metmike - March 27, 2022, 11:40 a.m.
Like Reply

Thanks Larry,

10's of millions of republicans are total convinced that the election was stolen from convinced as members of a cult believe the nonsense fed to them by their cult leader.

They intentionally go to sources of information that bolster that absurd belief because they WANT TO believe it and the Donald Trump should be the president right now.

Their view of Mike Pence is different than mine.

Mine, could be viewed with this analogy.

If you were driving down the road and came up to a red light for you, with traffic and people crossing in front of you because that side has the green light and the right of way but some crazy person in the back seat was yelling in your ear "accelerate forward!" "Run those people over!" "Red means go!"  and you, instead, kept your foot on the brake, waiting for the light to turn green and even then, made sure all the pedestrians crossing/traffic had finished getting to the other side.

Are the drivers of all vehicles  heros at every traffic light or stop sign for following the law and not running over people?

Calling them patriots or hero's for following the well understood laws and completely proven reasons for having those laws cheapens REAL acts of patriots or hero' people that went into the burning buildings on 9-11-01.

Pence did the right thing because he could think clearly and didn't belong to the Trump cult that has stolen the critical thinking away from 10's of millions of republicans.

If the person in the back seat of the car above, had paid for the gas in the car, or even owned the car...... should the driver, then run over people because they told them to do it?

We live in a world with extremely gullible, non critically thinking people that will justify believing in things that they want to believe in. 

And they constantly point out examples from the other party doing it(some valid/some not) but are unable to see themselves falling for all the same tricks. 

Even smart people.

It's called cognitive bias.

By mcfarm - March 27, 2022, 1:27 p.m.
Like Reply

apparently MM you might want to review the many cruel and untrue things Ginsberg said both as speech and interview fodder. I was there. I read and watched and then I watched the left and their reaction. Review it, you cannot miss the hypocrisy. Any other justice makes that mistake about a lib will be vilified for months. Happens nearly daily in the press and you know it. Hell just consider the hearings last week and the way they are covered. Total bias from the press.

By metmike - March 27, 2022, 3:23 p.m.
Like Reply

mcfarm, you shut down the conversation between us on this when you completely made up a position that I don't have and assigned it to me so that you could attack.

In addition, you are rambling on about something that has 0 relevance to this.

So all I'm doing now is analyzing your behavior NOT having a conversation with you. 

By metmike - March 28, 2022, 12:24 p.m.
Like Reply

This particular situation might have more relevance when it comes to the relationship of family to a key political person.

WATCH: CNN’s Brian Stelter struggles when faced with double standard in reporting

CNN Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter could not answer why there is a “rush to dismiss Hunter [Biden’s laptop investigation] as not a relevant story” while quite a bit of coverage has gone to conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and the text messages of his wife, Ginni.