Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said he worried about declining respect for institutions and the rule of law because “It bodes ill for a free society.”
He was mad because people did not accept the leaked draft ruling that would end a woman’s right to choose and acted like spoiled children who did not get their way. People needed to accept the fact that institutions do not always, nor should they be expected to “give you only the outcome you want, or can be bullied” into.
People should learn to “live with outcomes” even the ones they do not agree with, like the results of a popular vote, for instance.
Take his own wife with whom, I assume, he has conversations and with whom, I also assume, Clarence is familiar.
Although having a known history of working for conservative causes a number of which have been cases before the Supreme Court her husband sits on, Ginni Thomas was also a major player in what led up to the January 6, 2021 insurrection by her helping with organizing a pro-Trump gathering just south of the White House, and attending the pre-siege “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6.
After the 2020 election victory of Joe Biden she communicated often with then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, discussing strategies to overturn the election results, and putting pressure on congressional Republicans to overturn the election because she and others did not agree with the results of how the majority of us had voted.
She was an active participant in the effort to overturn the election.
When those who, like her, did not want to accept the outcome of the election took their case to the Supreme Court, Mr. Ginni Thomas was one of the nine justices hearing the case. He was also the only vote in favor of Trump in a second case related to disclosing important information to Congress.
Now we are getting to see and hear texts and audio recordings that pretty much explains why Clarence may have been covering for his wife.
In this case it is not spoiled brats not getting their way that bodes ill for society. it is the hypocrisy in the Supreme Court upon which people sit who repeatedly committed acts of perjury under oath to get a seat on a Court that is supposed to be based on truth in order to pack the court to get a desired outcome that others are being lectured about needing to mature up and accept, and the wife of a Supreme Court Judge having been involved in devising ways to undo the will of the people with which she did not agree knowing cases created this way would end up before her husband to be voted on and decided by her husband being seen by an intelligent citizenry that is doing that .
.
.
.
.
.
