Jan. 6 Committee Unlikely to Subpoena Ginni Thomas, as Liz Cheney Reportedly .....

[LenaBaby61]

Doesn’t Want to Tarnish Clarence Thomas."



I don't trust Liz Cheney as far as I can throw the Empire State Building, so does this mean that Treasonous Thomas can remain on the court (because he's not ever going to recuse himself from anything dealing with what happened on Jan. 6th), and his wife can continue on with texting and terrorizong our nation, spouting reigh-winged bullshit, and trying to overthrow what little democracy we have left with her QAnon buddies?


Very little will happen to you when you're reich-winged


Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) does not want the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot to avoid issuing a subpoena for Virginia Thomas. The congresswoman does not want to tarnish Thomas’ husband, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, the New York Times reported.

At this stage it appears the committee is unlikely to issue her a subpoena, per the Times.

Ginni Thomas texted former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows more than two-dozen times after the 2020 election.

According to the Washington Post, Thomas hoped to inspire former President Donald Trump in his effort to overturn the results.

“Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!!” Ginni Thomas wrote to Meadows on Nov. 10, 2020. “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.”

Meadows wrote to Ginni Thomas two weeks later, saying, “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.”

Ginni Thomas also sent Meadows a message which invoked a QAnon conspiracy theory about watermarked mail-in ballots.

The committee obtained the messages from Meadows before he stopped cooperating.

Ginni Thomas, meanwhile, has been under public scrutiny for some time.


The paper reported,

According to the Times, Cheney wished to avoid targeting the wife of a Supreme Court justice beloved by conservatives.

In the Thomases, the committee is up against a couple that has deep networks of support across the conservative movement and Washington, including inside the committee. The panel’s Republican vice chairwoman, Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, has led the charge in holding Mr. Trump to account for his efforts to overturn the election, but has wanted to avoid any aggressive effort that, in her view, could unfairly target Justice Thomas, the senior member of the Supreme Court.

So although a debate has broken out inside the committee about summoning Ms. Thomas to testify, the panel at this point has no plans to do so, leaving some Democrats frustrated. That could change, however: On Friday, despite the potential for political backlash, Ms. Cheney indicated she has no objection to the panel asking Ms. Thomas for a voluntary interview.

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/jan-6-committee-unlikely-to-subpoena-ginni-thomas-as-liz-cheney-reportedly-doesnt-want-to-tarnish-clarence-thomas/

[uponit7771]

1. Unnn, Cheney is one vote on the panel.

[lame54]

2. She doesn't want another Biden pick...

Politics over country

[agingdem]

3. Who writes this stuff?

the J6 committee is not frustrated...they know Ginni will not come voluntarily..they know she'll defy the subpoena and they know if she does show she'll invoke the 5th..so why waste time and energy on this...they have the goods...they have the emails, they know she was at the rally..they know

[lapucelle]

5. The NYT buried the lede at the end of paragraph 5 in the service of clickbait,

and Mediaite amplified the storyline.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last sentence of the fifth paragraph:

On Friday, despite the potential for political backlash, Ms. Cheney indicated she has no objection to the panel asking Ms. Thomas for a voluntary interview.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/25/us/ginni-thomas-january-6-committee.html

[dchill]

6. +1,000,000

[lapucelle]

7. NYT print edition headline for the same story: "Debate on Asking Justice's Wife to Testify"

A version of this article appears in print on March 26, 2022, Section A, Page 14 of the New York edition with the headline: Debate on Asking Justice’s Wife to Testify.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/25/us/ginni-thomas-january-6-committee.html

[agingdem]

8. reason#25 why I cancelled my NYT subscription

I said adios to the NYT years ago..the paper's Hillary coverage was nauseating...for a paper that supposedly had no lost love for Trump, they disregarded their decades long "Trump is a joke" coverage and served him up as a viable candidate....and then there's Maggie Haberman, Trump's sucks up...

[LenaBaby61]

10. I canceled the NY Times when they pushed the Iraq war along with cheerleader Judith Miller ....

There are still some very good writers there, but not enough for me to keep my subscription going.

And it's Hillary coverage was worse than nauseating, and Haberman's STILL a full on, tRump suck up.

[lapucelle]

4. "Ms Cheney indicated she has no objection to the panel asking Ms. Thomas for a voluntary interview."

according to the NYT.

On Friday, despite the potential for political backlash, Ms. Cheney indicated she has no objection to the panel asking Ms. Thomas for a voluntary interview.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/25/us/ginni-thomas-january-6-committee.html

[blueinredohio]

9. What? I'm shocked!!