AOC goes BERSERK on Clarence Thomas: RESIGN or face IMPEACHMENT

That ^ was a sterling example of all the nothing you have to post. 👏

If Desitin isn’t working for your massive butthurt, maybe see a doctor. It could be hemorrhoids. And speaking of assholes, AOC’s commentary about Justice Thomas (the actual thread topic) was another sterling example.
Go back and read post #11.
Now read the following...

You took it out of context and started bleeping about texts.
I stand that there is a conflict of interest and Thomas should recuse himself.
Now if that isn't good enough for you go suck eggs.

 
Go back and read post #11.
Now read the following...

You took it out of context and started bleeping about texts.
I stand that there is a conflict of interest and Thomas should recuse himself.
Now if that isn't good enough for you go suck eggs.

I’ll correct you later. It’s ok though. I didn’t expect honesty out of you.
 
Between 2003 and 2007, Virginia Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, earned $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation, according to a Common Cause review of the foundation’s IRS records. Thomas failed to note the income in his Supreme Court financial disclosure forms for those years, instead checking a box labeled “none” where “spousal noninvestment income” would be disclosed.

Clarence Thomas failed to report wife's income, watchdog says
Pffft. Hunter Biden spends more on crack on any given month.
 
If you wish to believe his wife made the kind of money claimed and he was clueless, well...........not exactly high praise for a Supreme Court justice.
EH? He's supposed to manage the finances for the little woman too?

Guess that uppity black man should have ran his home like it was 1920 instead of 2020?
 
Are you sure you want to make this offer?
Considering you'd all be paying 7.50 or more for gas overnight I think we'd get along a lot better than the rest of the country. :auiqs.jpg:

Just be sure and take out a second mortgage before heading to the pumps or the grocery store if Texas were to leave the union.
 
Go back and read post #11.
Now read the following...

You took it out of context and started bleeping about texts.
I stand that there is a conflict of interest and Thomas should recuse himself.
Now if that isn't good enough for you go suck eggs.

As I thought. You got caught in a lie. Post 11 was about one thing. But I jumped in at post 46: AOC goes BERSERK on Clarence Thomas: RESIGN or face IMPEACHMENT

That’s the one where you said “prove it or stfu.” The “it” was a reference to what had just been said to you by OKTexas. And that was that Meadows had submitted the texts before the court heard the case.

I’m sorry you’re so damn stupid. I spend lots of time feeling sorry for you. But that’s casual. You have my blessing to go suck those eggs.
 
As I thought. You got caught in a lie. Post 11 was about one thing. But I jumped in at post 46: AOC goes BERSERK on Clarence Thomas: RESIGN or face IMPEACHMENT

That’s the one where you said “prove it or stfu.” The “it” was a reference to what had just been said to you by OKTexas. And that was that Meadows had submitted the texts before the court heard the case.

I’m sorry you’re so damn stupid. I spend lots of time feeling sorry for you. But that’s casual. You have my blessing to go suck those eggs.
Hah! Face the truth. I said it and you fucked up and made an ass out of yourself. That's the truth.
 
As I thought. You got caught in a lie. Post 11 was about one thing. But I jumped in at post 46: AOC goes BERSERK on Clarence Thomas: RESIGN or face IMPEACHMENT

That’s the one where you said “prove it or stfu.” The “it” was a reference to what had just been said to you by OKTexas. And that was that Meadows had submitted the texts before the court heard the case.

I’m sorry you’re so damn stupid. I spend lots of time feeling sorry for you. But that’s casual. You have my blessing to go suck those eggs.
And by the way, is grasping at straws how you try to save face? Take a few more days and think about that character flaw you self-impose on others.
 
Hah! Face the truth. I said it and you fucked up and made an ass out of yourself. That's the truth.
I am the one facing the truth. And you’re persisting in the making of an ass of yourself. Just because you’re too fully dishonest to admit that you’ve been checkmated doesn’t mean you have any actual moves left.
 
And by the way, is grasping at straws how you try to save face? Take a few more days and think about that character flaw you self-impose on others.
Yeah. You’re fully exposed.

I’d spend more time laughing at you (you, of all people, discussing character flaws), but now that I’ve wrecked you, I think I’ll turn my attention to a worthier opponent.
 
I am the one facing the truth. And you’re persisting in the making of an ass of yourself. Just because you’re too fully dishonest to admit that you’ve been checkmated doesn’t mean you have any actual moves left.
Now you mock me. Go away.
 
Yeah. You’re fully exposed.

I’d spend more time laughing at you (you, of all people, discussing character flaws), but now that I’ve wrecked you, I think I’ll turn my attention to a worthier opponent.
Back again. Damn. You are mental.
 
Back again. Damn. You are mental.
You have no honor and no credibility.

Ok. Back on topic (and feel free to continue to duck it), try a simple set of questions:

1. If Clarence Thomas’ wife has a Constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of speech and a Constitutionally guaranteed right to petition her government for the redress of grievances, and did so about her views concerning the alleged theft of the Presidential election, is it your position that because of her use of her rights, Justice Thomas must recuse himself over any 1/6 case that could come before the high Court?

2. If not, then is it your position that if she uses her free speech right to petition the government on behalf of some client (lobbying related), this means that her husband, the Justice, has a conflict of interest?

There are numerous other related questions. But those two should suffice to get the ball rolling. You game?
 
Go back and read post #11.
Now read the following...

You took it out of context and started bleeping about texts.
I stand that there is a conflict of interest and Thomas should recuse himself.
Now if that isn't good enough for you go suck eggs.

He's not his wife and this has never been the standard at any point in history for SCOTUS justices.

Ginzberg and Sotomayor have both been active politically supporting various groups and issues that come before the court.

If you folks had actual scruples that applied equally to each side you might have an argument to make but as it is you absolutely do not.
 
EH? He's supposed to manage the finances for the little woman too?

Guess that uppity black man should have ran his home like it was 1920 instead of 2020?

No one said he should manage her finances but you know this is a dishonest answer but the world seems to be full of dishonest people.
 
He's not his wife and this has never been the standard at any point in history for SCOTUS justices.

Ginzberg and Sotomayor have both been active politically supporting various groups and issues that come before the court.

If you folks had actual scruples that applied equally to each side you might have an argument to make but as it is you absolutely do not.
The justices you mentioned... are they affiliated with the Jan 6 fiasco? Not like Ms. Thomas. You seem to think it's all imaginary what went down. Pretty sad.
You can have that so called justice Thomas. He should never been appointed in the first place. You can thank affirmative action for that.
 
The justices you mentioned... are they affiliated with the Jan 6 fiasco? Not like Ms. Thomas. You seem to think it's all imaginary what went down. Pretty sad.
You can have that so called justice Thomas. He should never been appointed in the first place. You can thank affirmative action for that.
Newsflash to okwhine. Ginny Thomas is not on the bench. Justice Thomas is. What’s imaginary is your stupid ASSumption that he has any basis to recuse himself because of her political beliefs and expressions. You are quite ignorant.

Also, you dumbass, Justice Thomas wasn’t “appointed.” He was nominated and then subjected to the racism of shitheads like then Senator Biden in the guise of a confirmation hearing. Despite the Senate Democrat racist clown show, Justice Thomas was confirmed.

As always, your views are baseless and you are highlighted as the retard you are.
 

Forum List

Back
Top