General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"If Clarence Thomas doesn't resign when will impeachment proceedings against him begin?"
@MaryLTrump
A lot of people in the media are asking "Should Clarence Thomas recuse himself?" (Whether or not the answer to that is "Yes," he won't.) But that's the wrong question. The right one is this: "If Clarence Thomas doesn't resign when will impeachment proceedings against him begin?"
Link to tweet
?s=20&t=yU1wMq_9v2ijE6re0Bq9TQ
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)jimfields33
(15,364 posts)Being kicked off the court by the house.
Lovie777
(11,890 posts)and the GQP in congress will never vote for impeachment especially in the Senate that have two D's that will side with them.
P.S. The United States Supreme Court has been tainted for awhile - the three last GQP US SC justices made sure that happened.
multigraincracker
(32,461 posts)treason.
Rebl2
(13,236 posts)There will be no removal of Thomass
JohnSJ
(91,807 posts)we only have a short time before the midterms
FalloutShelter
(11,704 posts)The Congress and Senate?
Electing at least 67 democrats in the Senate is the only way to get a conviction, and that is mission impossible .
Manchin we can't predict.
Hugin
(32,680 posts)Ironic here.
JohnnyRingo
(18,563 posts)And I suspect you're right. She knows we don't just impeach SC members and move on.
So far he's just been the cantankerous old piece of crap he always was.
no_hypocrisy
(45,625 posts)I'd like to have a wide spectrum of articles and letters of condemnation from legal scholars, judges (both state and federal), officeholders, prosecutors, attorneys, and professors and deans of law schools. The articles and letters should lay out specific points of the transgressions of both Clarence Thomas and his wife. Not to forget the American Bar Association.
If my hopes are realized, the country will see and know what has happened.
While I'm not certain if this gesture will exact change, it's better than remaining silent.
agingdem
(7,696 posts)every decision dissembled her life in and out of government her/his contacts, far right organizations I hate paparazzi but for the esteemed Clarence and Ginni I will make an exception..their faces, their comings and going all over social media I want them isolated and excluded a living hell
Kaleva
(36,093 posts)dem4decades
(11,208 posts)Raven123
(4,661 posts)3) Given #2, it would be a political loser. It not that the issue is trivial. There is just SO much happening. The Jan 6th Committee hearings, Ukraine, inflation for example.
Stainless
(717 posts)Then American Democracy is dead and the vile neofascist bastards have won. Sieg Heil baby!
2naSalit
(85,637 posts)To successfully remove him from the bench.
Piratedog
(256 posts)I dont like Thomas but there arent grounds to impeach. Neither is there a reason for him to resign. Yes, it looks bad that his wife is a seditionist but how is he accountable for her actions?
LetMyPeopleVote
(143,638 posts)I do not see how you get to 67 votes in the Senate
FreepFryer
(7,077 posts)...but itll likely figure differently than an impeachment in the House and failed removal in the Senate.
However, a successful House impeachment and then a refusal to refer the matter to the Senate is not outside the realm of possibility, as I recall that was floated during the first Trump impeachment.
Firestorm49
(3,995 posts)remove him, and I dont know if that would be the case, Manchin and Sinema could not be counted to seal the deal.
FreepFryer
(7,077 posts)To my understanding, the impeachment vote is the one undertaken in the House, and the removal/conviction vote is the one held in the Senate.
So technically, Manchin and Sinema complicate the removal vote, not the impeachment vote.
former9thward
(31,684 posts)It is not a majority vote. It is 2/3s or 67 votes. There is no way to get to that number no matter what Manchin or Sinema do.
FreepFryer
(7,077 posts)And they complicate it insofar as they have a complex party line voting history.
former9thward
(31,684 posts)No way there is 67 votes for removal no matter what they do or don't do.
FreepFryer
(7,077 posts)Hypothetically.
Thanks, though!
niyad
(112,062 posts)Buckeyeblue
(5,489 posts)It should be voluntary to set the record straight. If he refuses he should, along with his text messages, be subpoenaed. I would want to know if he offered legal advice or legal coverage to the group(s) trying to overthrow the government.
Because if he did, that would be collusion. I think. And maybe we skip impeachment and go right to indictment. As part of his plea bargain, he can resign.
What if a sitting justice goes to prison but congress refuses to impeach and convict?
Polybius
(15,184 posts)There's no way that she's gonna do it again. Three times with no conviction won't look good on the legacy.
usajumpedtheshark
(672 posts)the presidency. And they certainly would never admit they made mistakes.
Emile
(21,548 posts)gulliver
(13,142 posts)The Thomases are, for all intents and purposes, using the same grift pattern the Trumps and Fox News use. We keep getting lost in the misdirection and miss the money flow.