House Select Committee Hearings on Jan. 6 (1 Viewer)

[MT15]

Let’s put our discussion in this thread we can use it for all the hearings.

 

[DaveXA]

And of course...

Of course, lol. Interesting that ACB sided with the majority.

 

[Lapaz]

And of course...

I hope congress can find a basis to impeach Thomas. He seems to make every effort to block justice. His wife is a traitor, and he seems to be aiding and abetting her.

Can the Senate establish a committee comparable to the House Jan 6th committee to continue to investigate them and other corroborators?

 

[DaveXA]

I hope congress can find a basis to impeach Thomas. He seems to make every effort to block justice. His wife is a traitor, and he seems to be aiding and abetting her.

Can the Senate establish a committee comparable to the House Jan 6th committee to continue to investigate them and other corroborators?

That would be unprecedented and I think would be a serious breach of separation of powers. That said, I do think there are some mechanism within the Court to deal with this, but I don't see that happening.

I think best we can hope for is for him to retire sooner than later.

 

[Lapaz]

That would be unprecedented and I think would be a serious breach of separation of powers. That said, I do think there are some mechanism within the Court to deal with this, but I don't see that happening.

I think best we can hope for is for him to retire sooner than later.

Why is it a breach? Judges have been impeached before. If evidence arises that he aided the January 6th insurrection, then he should be impeached.

 

[DaveXA]

Why is it a breach? Judges have been impeached before. If evidence arises that he aided the January 6th insurrection, then he should be impeached.

I agree, but I haven't seen that evidence. There has to be incontrovertible evidence, otherwise it's a waste of time. Only one has ever been impeached, and that one was in 1805 and he was acquitted in the Senate. So in effect, no SCOTUS justice has ever been removed from office. There are things we can look at, but this one is simply not going to happen, and certainly not if the Republicans gain a majority in the House where the articles of impeachment would be drafted and voted on.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

That would be unprecedented and I think would be a serious breach of separation of powers. That said, I do think there are some mechanism within the Court to deal with this, but I don't see that happening.

I think best we can hope for is for him to retire sooner than later.

Breach how? Is it a breach when they impeach someone in the executive branch? And as been posted, federal judges have been impeached and removed before.

 

[DaveXA]

Breach how? Is it a breach when they impeach someone in the executive branch? And as been posted, federal judges have been impeached and removed before.

Sure, but it's stupid rare. Like, as I stated, no SCOTUS justice has ever been removed from office via impeachment, and you'd need the House majority Democrat for it to be a possibility. I'm not so sure what he's being accused of qualifies as something worthy of pursing an unlikely successful impeachment attempt.

I'd support it, but I don't see it happening. Anyway, the current committee has bigger fish to fry in Trump. I'd rather keep the heat on Trump and far away from the WH.

 

[Lapaz]

Sure, but it's stupid rare. Like, as I stated, no SCOTUS justice has ever been removed from office via impeachment, and you'd need the House majority Democrat for it to be a possibility. I'm not so sure what he's being accused of qualifies as something worthy of pursing an unlikely successful impeachment attempt.

I'd support it, but I don't see it happening. Anyway, the current committee has bigger fish to fry in Trump. I'd rather keep the heat on Trump and far away from the WH.

I agree that Thomas is a lower priority than Trump and his acolytes getting into the Whitehouse, and also that the evidence has to be strong, but at the very least, Thomas should be investigated. He is doing a lot of things in the open that suggests that he's aligned with the people trying to overthrow our elections, so the question is whether he is conspiring with them. An open investigation may also lead the Supreme Court to recuse him from January 6th cases.

 

[DaveXA]

I agree that Thomas is a lower priority than Trump and his acolytes getting into the Whitehouse, and also that the evidence has to be strong, but at the very least, Thomas should be investigated. He is doing a lot of things in the open that suggests that he's aligned with the people trying to overthrow our elections, so the question is whether he is conspiring with them. An open investigation may also lead the Supreme Court to recuse him from January 6th cases.

If he's stupid enough to conspire with them, he absolutely should be impeached and removed from office. But, I don't think he's that stupid.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

If he's stupid enough to conspire with them, he absolutely should be impeached and removed from office. But, I don't think he's that stupid.

His wife though...

 

[DaveXA]

His wife though...

Indeed.

 

[Lapaz]

If he's stupid enough to conspire with them, he absolutely should be impeached and removed from office. But, I don't think he's that stupid.

Even if he is aware of a conspiracy that he doesn't report, such as by his wife, then that is impeachable. I think he's dirty, but proving it is another matter.

 

[DaveXA]

Even if he is aware of a conspiracy that he doesn't report, such as by his wife, then that is impeachable. I think he's dirty, but proving it is another matter.

Sure, I'd be somewhat surprised if he wasn't aware of it. That said, not all husbands and wives share everything. If his wife knew what she was doing would compromise him, it stands to reason she might not tell him about it. Some marriages, the spouses do their own thing. I've seen firsthand marriages where the spouses kept part of their lives secret from each other.

So, absent proof, impeaching Thomas is pure fantasy.

 

[samiam5211]

Even if he is aware of a conspiracy that he doesn't report, such as by his wife, then that is impeachable. I think he's dirty, but proving it is another matter.

He would probably just say, "Ginni says crazy shirt all the time, i never know when she's being serious"

 

[Lapaz]

Sure, I'd be somewhat surprised if he wasn't aware of it. That said, not all husbands and wives share everything. If his wife knew what she was doing would compromise him, it stands to reason she might not tell him about it. Some marriages, the spouses do their own thing. I've seen firsthand marriages where the spouses kept part of their lives secret from each other.

So, absent proof, impeaching Thomas is pure fantasy.

I agree with you that proof is needed, but there is enough smoke around him due to his wife's actions to warrant an investigation to determine what Clarence may have known or done.

 

[Lapaz]

He would probably just say, "Ginni says crazy shirt all the time, i never know when she's being serious"

Saying Ginni says crazy stuff all of the time wouldn't clear him. If someone says something crazy about committing a crime, it is your responsibility to report it. Investigators then have to make the judgement on how to handle it. We get trained on this all of the time in the Federal government.

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

IT WAS AN INSIDE JOB JUST TO MAKE TRUMP LOOK BAD....lol .. ANTIFA!!!!