ginny thomas has a right to free speech, ginny thomas said before the january 6th select committee thather in email to try to get state legislators to overturn the results of elections of battleground states. those are her rights as an american. but she has told us she talked to her best friend about that. we also have evidence in front of our faces that justice thomas was an outlier. he was the only one that didn't agree with the rest of his conservative justices on one of the decisions impacting the flow of information to the committee, and he's an outlier with gorsuch and one other on other decisions. why are we even talking about this. why does john roberts have so little concern that only 7% of the american people trust them? >> well, it's because, i think, that, again, john roberts views that it would be an institutional surrender of sorts, or he would somehow be worsening the amount of power that the supreme court as a branch of government wields. if he suddenly created some independent authority to investigate the matter of the thomases or if he conducted a serious investigation

lately ginni thomas is showing people throughout the government, and justice thomas's ruling on caseso that. there is the road leak case. and the investigation, which was extremely not done by an outside party. nothing ever happen, and they cannot force the justices to sign statements. justice alito was credibly accused of leaking a prior case. and when he said no i did not do, it there was no investigation, that was the end of the matter. they are going to have to become more transparent, from not only disclosing it more financial information, more persons information, and going all the. way they're gonna have to put a camera in that courtroom. who do they think they are? they deserve -- they think they are the supreme court for the 1700s. they are not. they are the supreme court in the 2000s, and we have every right to avail ourselves of the transparency, what is going on in the courtroom. >> cynthia, cynthia oxy, you always have the opinion is that i think ring true. thank, you my friend, for being here. and i hope you're doing okay. i do, know cynthia, i'm hoping that your florida

months later, the washington post -- thomas's wife, ginni thomas, had texted trump trump's chief of staffg trump to overturn the election results. any lower court judge would be forced to recuse. clarence thomas? the lone dissent. none of this is, shall we say, a good look. nor is it normal for our country's justice system. and that is why today, democratic senator chris murphy and democratic congressman hank johnson introduced bills to make ethics rules for the highest court in this land. joining us now is the man himself, chris murphy, senator from the great state of connecticut. senator murphy, thank you for being here with us tonight. can you tell me what you want to do in this bill? >> what we want to do is very simple. we want to make sure that every judge who sits on a federal bench has a code of conduct that the american people can see that applies to them. as you mentioned, right now, there are only nine justices that have no code of conduct. that's outrageous, especially at a moment where we are seeing this rather outlandish and transparent integration between the conservative j

we know that he in part co-founded groundswell with ginni thomas, groundswell a group of high-poweredservative activists that secretly convened and formed in part to sort of fight the establishment and fight the establishment conservatives from becoming more progressive, and we know in the lead up to january 6th months before the election was even over, as evidenced in that email that you just mentioned, that fitton and others were already sort of exploring some of these legal maneuvers to overturn the results of the election or at least delegitimize joe biden. you know, in addition, tom fitton had and has the former president's ear. he's someone who trump was listening to, was potentially serving as a liaison to these conservative groups to people like ginni thomas and others who were simultaneously engaging in efforts to get the states to overturn the results of the election by signing on to the fake scheme of electors plan being implemented, so tom fitton had his hands in a lot of different plans that were playing out all in the effort to overturn the results of the election in fav

ginni thomas lobbying mark meadows, the text messages revealed by the january 6th committee.re she wrote emails for them to overturn the results of the arizona election. i think there was another state. clarence thomas turning out to be the only justice to side with trump in his efforts to withhold documents. "the new york times" reporting that justice alito was accused of leaking the hobby lobby decision to some religious activists or stakeholders or it came out from someone in his circle. the ruse and failure to investigate the dobbs leak which could lead to the assassination of the justices, it was conducted by an internal investigator. and justice amy coney barrett's husband opening a branch of his firm and now this the chief justice's wife her talking about successful people attract successful people. dahlia, they don't seem to want to deal with this. this is on us. we shouldn't make lists like this, we shouldn't cover these stories. if they wanted to turn it around, what would that look like? >> everything brian just said. there is a reason that we have disclosure rules

the medias war on clearance and ginni thomas. rom the washington examiner case against thomas's, one more from the federalist, political. they watch the attack -- thank you, mister chairman. >> without objection, so ordered. the gentlelady from missouri, representative bush, is now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. i think the chair for convening this crucial hearing. as i listened to reverend schenck's testimony, i've been thinking about people who aren't dining with supreme court justices. who don't get to launch multi million dollar influence campaigns to strip away other peoples freedoms. we do not have access to people of power, but to feel the pain of powerful decisions. i'm thinking about nurses in missouri who have to comply with comprehensive and mandatory ethics standards, as i had to as a north in missouri. whose daily decision-making impact low income, marginalized, communities. and, i am thinking about black and brown women dealing with life threatening complications because of a lawless, on accountable, supr

we've got ginni thomas who called for biden to be impeached during the january 6 insurrection that tookow. i'm really discouraged. i think that this kind of stacking and placement of your kind of people, it is a power grab that i'm absolutely disgusted with. and the very fact that the supreme court makes our laws and clarifies our laws and yet they are just a dark and not ethical judicial part of our government, i'm disgusted with it. host: i got your point. here's a story from the new york times from the reporting from yesterday at the supreme court's ethics question. there were a thousand business times that chief justice wife jane sullivan roberts -- some of this before court, letters sent to congress claim that make present a kong -- conflict of interest. this is rhonda, sacramento, independent. caller: good morning, thank you. i have been a long time c-span and here we are. we are back on that merry-go-round. we have assault weapons problem, trying to ban gun violence. then police reform, again we are talking about it and the problems at the border. this seems like dÉjÀ vu. over th