Texas Paul REACTS to New Bombshell Ginni Thomas Scandal

The Ginni Thomas plot to overthrow the United States government is so much deeper than most people realize. Texas Paul reacts to the latest bombshell developments surrounding Ginni and Justice Thomas and lays out the case as to why Clarence Thomas must be impeached to save our Republic.

hey folks this is old texas paul i want

you to take a look at this video of

clarence thomas

and uh i’ll i’ll be right back one of

the things i say

in response to the media is when they

talk about especially early on about the

way i did my job i said i will

absolutely

leave the court when i do my job as

poorly as you do yours

and that was meant as a compliment

really

you hear that smoke some

do you hear that

can you listen to that and not tell me

that you believe that every word anita

hill said

was

absolute gospel

absolute gospel

you know i i want to read you another

quote

from and i wrote it down so that

made sure i got a word for word okay i

want to read you another quote from

clarence thomas

as a society we are becoming addicted to wanting
particular outcomes not living with the outcomes we don’t
like we can’t be an institution that can be bullied into giving you the outcome you
want

says the man that is overturning 50 years of legal

precedent by voting to drag down roe v wade
and whose wife is engaging in insurrection against our country

yeah i want to

just add a disclosure here okay this

isn’t just politics this this is

personal

i don’t just politically disagree with

clarence and jenny thomas

i

personally dislike them

they are a cancer on our country

and it is time to do something about it

it is time to do something about it you

know you go back to

take a look at clarence thomas

and he has been the worst

supreme court justice that i i i can you

know i’m a history buff and i i it’s

hard

to come up with one that has been worse

than clarence thomas he spent 10 years

10

years as a supreme court justice

and never asked a question

you know every once in a while

during the oral arguments a justice will

sit and listen

you know

maybe the questions that they had on or

whatever will be asked by another

justice whatever it’s not unheard of for

for a justice to sit quietly through

oral arguments occasionally but 10 years

10 years without a question that is a

record people

no one has ever even come close to that

just did not contribute to oral

arguments at all

and it’s not just lazy stupidity i mean

it’s it’s

he is a horrible

person

you look at the decisions

that that he’s he’s made you know like

flowers versus mississippi this was a

case that was clear clear-cut

this is a case that brett kavanaugh in

the majority opinion

said

the prosecutors were cartoonishly racist

brett kavanaugh called them cartoonishly

racist yeah clarence thomas said no that

was fine what they did was fine

yeah no no big deal

i mean he is

by far the worst

supreme court justice we have ever had

and his wife

has been flirting with the line between

activism and and just straight up

bribery

for a long time it goes back way back

when she worked with for the heritage

foundation if you remember if you’re old

like me you remember

the bush administration asked the

heritage foundation to give them a list

of

appointees the person at the heritage

foundation that was employed by the

heritage foundation and did that work

for bush

was jenny thomas while her husband

was listening to oral arguments

in bush v gore

i mean really that’s not a conflict i

mean you’ve got your wife working for

one of the people that is a complainant

it gets worse than that she started a

consulting company called liberty

consulting and she’s on

all of these radical right-wing

organizations boards

all i mean just

like turning point usa

if you don’t know who they are

they’re a group

that wants to recruit young people into

the conservative movement so they’ve set

up

you know organizations in on college

campuses all over the country

they just set one up in my grandson’s

college

um they’ve had a real problem they’ve

had a real problem they’ve had some

uh racism scandals

uh you know people that work there using

the n-word stuff like that but

by far the worst to come out was a woman

by the name of crystal clayton she just

flat out in one of her snapchats says i

hate black people

and bacon a day will keep the islam away

and she thought that was hilarious

that blew up and you know turning point

usa had had so many scandals

they ended up having to actually fire

her although actually they

guess they really didn’t because

uh jenny thomas was

on the advisory board for turning point

usa and crystal clayton went to working

from here

to working for jenny thomas

and she travels with her

she does some media work for her and

she’s

been to her home out in fairfax station

virginia and

taking pictures with her and you know

these are the kind of people that

that jenny thomas

works with and represents all the damn

time it’s really starting to get clouded

with her husband because

you know it’s like you’ve got this uh uh

center for security and policy there’s

another one uh the guy by then frank

gaffney runs that he’s paying jenny

thomas two hundred thousand dollars

for something

you know something we don’t know we

don’t know what kind of consulting she

does for him but at the same time frank

gaffney who has a real muslim problem

has been

identified by the anti-deaf defamation

league as putting forward conspiracy

theories about muslims and whatnot it

files an amicus brief

in trump’s muslim ban

yeah

the center for security policy files an

amicus brief on a case that’s before the

supreme court and has paid jenny thomas

two hundred thousand dollars and

clarence thomas uh

upheld the muslim play voted to uphold

the muslim ban it was uphill yeah

i mean

i i don’t know how more clear-cut that

that gets i mean you know i mean

you pumped two hundred 200 000 into the

thomas household

and you’re

filing amicus briefs on a case

that

thomas is hearing

yeah

and it gets worse people it gets worse

i mean

you think that’s bad i mean but it gets

they’re really a cancer on our society

it gets worse

we know that it had come out that jenny

thomas and all of her activism and

whatnot had been if you want to call it

that i call it insurrection had been

bombarding mark meadows with complaints

after the election she wanted sidney

powell

to represent

donald trump

she wanted to release the kraken and she

was putting forward all these q and on

conspiracy theories all over facebook

social media everywhere just bombing it

was just

nut balk and conspiracy theories and

blowing up mark meadows phone now i

i

don’t exactly know why the wife of a

supreme court justice would have the

president chief of staff’s phone number

but she did she’s just texting the

out of him trying to get him to

to overturn that election and not only

is jenny thomas telling mark meadows who

needs to lead trump’s legal defense

she’s telling him who to purge who to

fire in various departments and that she

wants to

to vet people and provide him with a

list of people she she is going to tell

the trump white house who to hire who’s

loyal to trump she wants to go through

and fire all the disloyal is that not

fascism i mean is that not pure fascism

she wants to go through and vet people

that she considers herself to be

disloyal to trump and provide them with

a list of people that she thinks will be

sufficiently loyal not loyal to the

constitution loyal to trump oh and

just an fyi one of the people on that

list serve

is john eastman

he’s a former clerk

of clarence thomas and if you

haven’t been following things john

eastman is trump’s lawyer

yeah he he just

was the one that lost his court case

uh to keep his coup memos he planned the

coup for donald

trump yeah

another

winner around

the uh

thomases

didn’t stop there she also got in touch

we find out with shauna bolek who is

at the time

right after the election working real

hard to get things overturned in arizona

she

being jenny thomas had contacted bolick

who is a good family friend her husband

clint bolick is on the arizona supreme

court and clarence thomas is their kid’s

godfather so jenny thomas is badgering

her to

set aside the

certification for the election just

undeclare biden the victor and create

their own slate of electors

i’m not even kidding

i’m not even kidding meanwhile clarence

thomas hears a case regarding

communications between the white house

and everybody trying to overthrow this

damn election and he doesn’t recuse

himself are you telling me that you

believe that clarence thomas didn’t know

his wife was contacting the bola

household i mean he’s he’s godfather to

their child you’re telling me he didn’t

know that he was contacting them asking

shauna bullock to to overturn this

election and shawna bullock didn’t shy

away either i mean she immediately told

jenny thomas how to protest you know

file protests and stuff in arizona and

the side note she’s running for

secretary of state now

yeah

good news there right because she

absolutely failed because she tried to

pass bill shauna bullock tried to pass a

bill in arizona that said the

legislature

could legally

just set aside

certifications

you know that was the problem they had

before is they couldn’t legally do it

they wanted to make it legal thank god

that got voted down but now she wants to

be secretary of state yeah folks these

people are a cancer they are a real

cancer

and we’ve got to root it out clarence

thomas needs to be impeached

he does

you know there there’s a

real problem

in our supreme court

it’s no longer

just calling balls and strikes

we’ve got people in that supreme court

that are

absolutely politically involved

they’re absolutely crossing the line

with where their money

and whatnot comes in blurring those

lines and jenny thomas is the worst of

it she had to apologize did you if you

don’t list service listserv is a lot of

people don’t listserv is just a service

where you

batch together a bunch of people on

emails and it and and you

create groups and you have discussions

back and forth

uh between people well all of clarence

thomas’s clerks are in a listserv group

together

jenny thomas just took over

clarence thomas’s

supreme court justice clarence thomas’s

list serve and tried to push this crazy

q anon

nut ball let’s overthrow the election

conspiracy

on the supreme supreme court justices

lister this is going out to judges these

former clerks are

all over the place she ended up having

to make a public apology for it but yeah

i mean think about that this is part of

his job now

she is getting involved in

all of his former clerks it’s insane

people it is just insane

this

is beyond the pale this has to stop

we have to impeach clarence thomas and

we have to impeach him now thanks folks

i

appreciate you texas paul out

Ginni and Clarence Thomas Have Done Enough Damage

What did Justice Clarence Thomas know, and when did he know it?

The question usually gets directed at politicians, not judges, but it’s a fair one in light of the revelation on Thursday that Justice Thomas’s wife, Ginni, was working feverishly behind the scenes — and to a far greater degree than she previously admitted — in a high-level effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

As The Washington Post and CBS News first reported, Ms. Thomas, a supremely well-connected right-wing agitator, was in constant communication with the White House in the weeks following the election, strategizing over how to keep Donald Trump in office despite his incontrovertible loss. “Do not concede,” she texted to Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s chief of staff, on Nov. 6, the day before the major news networks called the election for Joe Biden. “It takes time for the army who is gathering for his back.” (To date, Mr. Trump has not conceded.)

In dozens of messages with Mr. Meadows over several weeks, Ms. Thomas raged over baseless allegations of voter fraud and shared unhinged conspiracy theories, including one that the “Biden crime family” was in the process of being arrested and sent to Guantánamo Bay for “ballot fraud.”

“Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!!” Ms. Thomas wrote at one point. “The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History.”

Ms. Thomas had already acknowledged some involvement in the fight over the 2020 election count, recently confirming that she attended the Jan. 6 Stop the Steal rally in Washington, but she said she went home before Mr. Trump spoke to the crowd and before a mob of hundreds stormed the Capitol in a violent attempt to block the certification of Mr. Biden’s Electoral College victory. The texts reveal that her efforts to subvert the election were far more serious than we knew.

Now recall that in January, the Supreme Court rejected Mr. Trump’s request to block the release of White House records relating to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. Mr. Meadows had submitted a brief in the case supporting Mr. Trump. The court’s ruling came as an unsigned order, with only one noted dissent: from Justice Thomas.

Perhaps Justice Thomas was not aware of his wife’s text-message campaign to Mr. Meadows at the time. But it sure makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

And that’s precisely the problem: We shouldn’t have to wonder. The Supreme Court is the most powerful judicial body in the country, and yet, as Alexander Hamilton reminded us, it has neither the sword nor the purse as a means to enforce its rulings. It depends instead on the American people’s acceptance of its legitimacy, which is why the justices must make every possible effort to appear fair, unbiased and beyond reproach.

That may seem naïve, particularly in the face of the crippling assaults on the court that Mitch McConnell and his Senate Republicans have carried out over the past six years in order to secure a right-wing supermajority that often resembles a judicial policy arm of the Republican Party — starting with their theft of a vacancy that was President Barack Obama’s to fill and continuing through the last-second confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett while millions of voters were already in the process of casting Mr. Trump out of office.

And yet the public’s demand for basic fairness and judicial neutrality is not only proper but critical to the court’s integrity, as the justices, whoever nominated them, are well aware. Partly in response to the court’s tanking public-approval ratings, several of them have grown increasingly outspoken in defense of their independence. (Though not all of them.)

The most obvious way for justices to demonstrate that independence in practice, of course, is to recuse themselves from any case in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. It does not matter whether there is, in fact, a conflict of interest; the mere appearance of bias or conflict should be enough to compel Justice Thomas or any other member of the court to step aside.

Many of them have over the years, out of respect for the court as an institution and for the public’s faith in their probity. Just this week, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson vowed that if confirmed she would recuse herself from an upcoming case challenging Harvard’s affirmative-action policies, because of her multiple personal and professional connections to the university. Legal-ethics experts are not even in agreement that her recusal would be necessary, but Judge Jackson is right to err on the side of caution.

Justice Thomas has paid lip service to this ideal. “I think the media makes it sound as though you are just always going right to your personal preference,” he said in a speech last year. “That’s a problem. You’re going to jeopardize any faith in the legal institutions.”

Bench memo to the justice: You know what jeopardizes public faith in legal institutions? Refusing to recuse yourself from numerous high-profile cases in which your wife has been personally and sometimes financially entangled, as The New Yorker reported in January. Especially when you have emphasized that you and she are melded “into one being.” Or when you have, as The Times Magazine reported last month, appeared together with her for years “at highly political events hosted by advocates hoping to sway the court.”

Ms. Thomas’s efforts, and her husband’s refusal to respond appropriately, have been haunting the court for years, but this latest conflagration shouldn’t be a close call. “The texts are the narrowest way of looking at this,” Stephen Gillers, a New York University law professor and one of the nation’s foremost legal-ethics experts, told me. “She signed up for Stop the Steal. She was part of the team, and that team had an interest in how the court would rule. That’s all I need to know.” He said he has over the years resisted calling for Justice Thomas’s recusal based on his wife’s actions, “but they’ve really abused that tolerance.”

Yes, married people can lead independent professional lives, and it is not a justice’s responsibility to police the actions of his or her spouse. But the brazenness with which the Thomases have flouted the most reasonable expectations of judicial rectitude is without precedent. From the Affordable Care Act to the Trump administration’s Muslim ban to the 2020 election challenges, Ms. Thomas has repeatedly embroiled herself in big-ticket legal issues and with litigants who have wound up before her husband’s court. All the while, he has looked the other way, refusing to recuse himself from any of these cases. For someone whose job is about judging, Justice Thomas has, in this context at least, demonstrated abominably poor judgment.

If Justice Thomas were sitting on any other federal court in the country, he would likely have been required by the code of judicial ethics to recuse himself many times over. But the code does not apply to Supreme Court justices, creating a situation in which the highest court in the land is also the most unaccountable.

This is not tolerable. For years, Congress has tried in vain to extend the ethics code to the Supreme Court. For the sake of fundamental fairness and consistency, the code must apply to all federal judges; it would at the very least force the hand of those like Justice Thomas who seem unmoved by any higher sense of duty to the institution or to the American people who have agreed to abide by its rulings.

The court is in deep trouble these days, pervaded by what Justice Sonia Sotomayor recently called the “stench” of partisanship — a stench arising in no small part from the Thomases’ behavior. It is hard to imagine that the other justices, regardless of their personal politics, aren’t bothered.

No one should have to choose between their devotion to their spouse and their duty to the nation. But Justice Thomas has shown himself unwilling or unable to protect what remains of the court’s reputation from the appearance of extreme bias he and his wife have created. He would do the country a service by stepping down and making room for someone who won’t have that problem.