Why the Jan. 6 committee won’t officially investigate Ginni Thomas

Liberal Opinion

Rashad Richey

National TV Political Analyst, Talk Radio Host, Univ. Prof.
Archive |

The Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol has been primarily focused on what role former President Trump may have played leading up to the riot. The committee has subpoenaed a number of Trump’s former administration officials — most recently White House counsel Pat Cipollone — to ascertain what the former president may have known. While the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and former VP Mike Pence have been called to testify, Straight Arrow News contributor Rashad Richey believes he knows why they have not been subpoenaed or officially investigated:

Here’s what I think is going down. I think they know that if Ginni Thomas is fully investigated, if she testified, truthfully, that if Mike Pence is fully investigated, and if he testifies truthfully, that it will then be so conclusive that criminal charges must be applied against Donald Trump, which means the current Department of Justice would be in the political pickle of having to indict a former United States president. 

Remember, the Constitution does not allow, does not give, does not provide any special protections to a former US president. He’s a citizen just like you and I, he’s indictable. Okay. 

This comes down to Biden being an institutionalist to his department of justice, wanting to uphold the sanctity of the institution of the presidency. They don’t want to be put in the position of actually having to indict a former US president. 

And either Ginni Thomas or Mike Pence or maybe a combination of them both will surely land them to that conclusion. And that’s why they do not want them to testify. 

Now, here’s the other part. It doesn’t mean it can’t happen. That’s why it’s up at this point to progressives in the Democratic Party, who actually care about following all of the evidence to its natural conclusion rather than protecting institutions here and there and given some people immunity, that don’t deserve it whatsoever. 

So those who are conscious enough of the political game that’s being played most push the agenda, contact your congressional leader and pose the question. I had a great conversation with Congressman Ro Khanna out of California just a couple of days ago. And I said, listen, this doesn’t make sense. And he agreed. 

Ginni Thomas should be investigated. 

He agreed that the committee has decided to bypass certain people who obviously were engaged in criminal activity. Food for thought, at some point, the truth has to come out.

Okay, let me give you the 411 on the January 6 Investigative Committee. This is a primarily democratic committee. 

Now, some of you may not like what I have to say. Let me first start with the reality that what happened on January 6 was a terrorist attack. It was the use of violence and intimidation in order to impact a political outcome. That is your textbook definition of terrorism. Did Donald Trump animate violence against the United States government? Yes. Did Donald Trump want the process of transferring power to Biden to stop so he could remain President? Yes. Did he engage in a systematic effort to do so? Yes. 

Let’s go to the committee. The committee says they are simply investigating so that the American people can know exactly what’s happening. Let’s be very clear. This is strategic as well, on the side of the Democrats. What’s happening with this January 6 committee is political. Yes, it is performative, yes. That’s why it’s happening right before the midterm elections. This is not about following all of the evidence. I hoped it was in the beginning. But now I see clearly, this is about one thing. I’m going to bring you to that one thing in a moment. 

Let me ask you this. What is the primary occupation of a politician? When I asked that question, here’s what I mean. What do they occupy their time on? They occupy their time on how to stay in power, the ultimate goal of a politician, not a public servant, but a politician is to get reelected. That is it. They want to hold power.

Now look at what’s happening with the January 6 committee. They clearly have decided not to investigate certain elements that are in fact criminal. 

Let’s go to Ginny Thomas, the wife of Clarence Thomas. Their investigation and the investigation of investigative journalist have uncovered multiple text messages, emails showing that Ginny Thomas was involved in a coordinated effort to overthrow democracy to shred the Constitution, or a husband, a United States Supreme Court Justice, his votes 100% aligned with her activism, even when his vote disagrees with other conservatives on the bench.

The January 6 committee they have now been invited Ginni Thomas to testify to give clarification to her extreme involvement in the attempted coup of the United States government. It is interesting that it took this long and this much for them to give her an invite.

Remember, they did not give her a subpoena, and they could have, they did not put her officially under investigation with the committee and they should have, so they try to avoid this part.

It always agrees with Ginny Thomas, the January 6 committee, they decided not to investigate her, even though she was popping up in their investigation all over the place. They don’t want to touch her. She does not have any special immunity. There’s no law barring them from investigating her having her sit under a subpoena. 

Let’s go to Mike Pence, Mike Pence, who was at the center of this controversy. Mike Pence, who was approached about this before it even happened. Mike Pence who called Dan Quayle and said, Hey, Dan, can I overthrow the government? And Dan Quayle said you can’t. You don’t have an option here. Mike Pence says you don’t know the kind of pressure that I’m under Dan. Dan says no. The Constitution does not give you the authority to not certify the electors. You cannot do this Mike Pence wanted to. But he was counseled not to. Why is he not part of this investigation? Why have they sent a letter rather than a subpoena? Why send a request when you can send a demand? 

Let me tell you why. The people on this committee they’re not dumb. Sometimes they can be idiots, but they’re not dumb. These are bright people typically. In other words, they’re not sitting around saying, well, we didn’t think about Ginny Thomas. We didn’t think about Mike Pence. Of course, they thought about Ginny Thomas, of course, they thought about Mike Pence. They thought about them a lot. And they made a conscious decision to not include them in their investigation to not bring them under oath, to not investigate their phone calls, their emails, their text messages. 

And there’s a reason you see Ginny Thomas, represent your conduit to the US Supreme Court. Because I guarantee you, if they actually investigate Jenny Thomas, they will find clear evidence between Ginny Thomas and Clarence Thomas, and they are talking about cases in front of him. They don’t want that. Separate. Mike Pence is your conduit to Donald Trump, to the presidency to the institution.

You see, Democrats in particular still think there’s something very sacred about the office. 

Republicans they have abandoned sacredness of a political position a long time ago. And if there was anything left, Donald Trump took that completely out. Now I’m arguing the progressive position here, that you have to follow the evidence wherever the evidence takes you. 

Now, here’s the dynamic that’s chilling. What if the evidence they would uncover by investigating Ginny Thomas, and Mike Pence is so damning. It’s so extreme that no one in this country would doubt that they tried to illegally take an entire nation. What if that happens? What if that’s what they want to avoid? 

Here’s what I think is going down. I think they know that if Ginni Thomas is fully investigated, if she testified, truthfully, that if Mike Pence is fully investigated, and if he testifies truthfully, that it will then be so conclusive that criminal charges must be applied against Donald Trump, which means the current Department of Justice would be in the political pickle of having to indict a former United States president. 

Remember, the Constitution does not allow, does not give does not provide any special protections to a former US president. He’s a citizen just like you and I, he’s indictable. Okay. 

This comes down to Biden being an institutionalist, to his department of justice, wanting to uphold the sanctity of the institution of the presidency, they don’t want to be put in the position of actually having to indict a former US president. 

And either Ginni Thomas, or Mike Pence, or maybe a combination of them both will surely land them to that conclusion. And that’s why they do not want them to testify. 

Now, here’s the other part. It doesn’t mean it can’t happen. That’s why it’s up at this point to progressives in the Democratic Party, who actually care about following all of the evidence to its natural conclusion rather than protecting institutions here and there and given some people immunity, that don’t deserve it whatsoever. 

So those who are conscious enough of the political game that’s being played most push the agenda, contact, your congressional leader posed the question. I had a great conversation with Congressman ro Khanna out of California just a couple of days ago. And I said, Listen, this doesn’t make sense. And he agreed. 

Ginni Thomas should be investigated. 

He agreed that the committee has decided to bypass certain people who obviously were engaged in criminal activity, food for thought, at some point, the truth has to come out.

comment bubbles Tell us what you think!


All comments will be moderated for relevancy and civility.

Comments


Comments are still pending approval. Watch the report to add your own thoughts above.

Related Reports

Liberal Opinion What color is Santa Claus?

By