The View co-host Whoopi Goldberg is known to partake in a little puff-puff-pass. But she may have hotboxed her dressing room on Wednesday as she outrageously suggested Justice Clarence Thomas was leading the U.S. Supreme Court in a charge to overturn Loving v. Virginia and abolish interracial marriage (despite the fact he’s in an interracial marriage). She even suggested that former President Trump didn’t really nominate the three justices he put on the bench.
Goldberg’s lies about Thomas came as she sniped at Ohio Republican Congressman Jim Jordan, proclaiming, “what the Democrats seem to be running on is also protecting everyone's rights regardless.” “Especially for a lot of folks who are also married interracially which is coming up, you know, bobbing its ugly head around; talking about moving that,” she added.
Co-host Joy Behar pipped up and noted that “Clarence Thomas is not going to move on that one because his wife is white.” This led to a back and forth where Goldberg insisted that her lie was the truth and seemed to convince Behar for a moment:
GOLDBERG: Well, let’s find out. He’s the one who sort of brought it up.
BEHAR: Well, he didn't bring that one up.
GOLDBERG: Yeah, he brought that one up.
BEHAR: Did he?
GOLDBERG: Yes, he did. Yes, he did.
Former federal prosecutor and co-host Sunny Hostin appeared as a bizarre voice of reason in the situation and recalled that Thomas’s concurring opinion (which she failed to mention didn’t have any co-signers) “did not talk about Loving v. [Virginia].”
“No, but I'm telling you, when he spoke about all the things that could go, this was one of the things he brought up,” Goldberg wrongly insisted.
After coming back from a commercial break, Goldberg desperately read from Thomas’s opinion and twisted his words to double down on her ridiculous accusation:
The first thing I want to do is when we were talking about Loving v. Virginia, this is what Clarence said. He said his concurring opinion is, “we should reconsider all of the court's substantive due process precedents including Griswold,” and then he went on to name them. When you say “all,” I think you're talking -- I think you're talking about all of them and you're not playing. You know?
At no point did she care to explain why Thomas would want to abolish interracial marriages while being in on himself. Is she suggesting Thomas is making a long contrived play at a divorce?
And a few minutes later, while Hostin was complaining about Trump getting to nominate three justices, Goldberg interrupted to announce that Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett never went through the official nomination process.
“Well, it wasn't even a nomination, really. They just put them through,” she asserted. “They just kind of put them through and sat they there and said – and lied through their teeth.” Hostin tried to rephrase what Goldberg meant to say as “They were rubber-stamped.”
These lies about Justice Clarence Thomas were made possible because of lucrative sponsorships from Consumer Cellular and Olay. Their contact information is linked.
The transcript is below, click “expand” to read:
ABC’s The View
July 20, 2022
11:03:47 a.m. Eastern(…)
WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Jim Jordan, I know you don't really pay attention to much, but I will say that what the Democrats seem to be running on is also protecting everyone's rights regardless. Whoever you love or whoever you're married to, or if you’re married, I don't know. But they're trying to make sure that the rights you are so easily, you know, able to give away, we're trying to hold on and say, actually, you can't do that.
Especially for a lot of folks who are also married interracially which is coming up, you know, bobbing its ugly head around; talking about moving that.
JOY BEHAR: Clarence Thomas is not going to move on that one because his wife is white.
GOLDBERG: Well, let’s find out. He’s the one who sort of brought it up.
BEHAR: Well, he didn't bring that one up.
GOLDBERG: Yeah, he brought that one up.
BEHAR: Did he?
GOLDBEGR: Yes, he did. Yes, he did.
SUNNY HOSTIN: What he did say was in his concurring opinion that overturned federal abortion rights, he wrote that similar cases should be reconsidered. He said Griswold should be considered.
BEHAR: Which is what?
HOSTIN: Which is the right to contraception. He said Lawrence v. Texas should be reconsidered, the right to same-sex intimacy, and Oberefell – I think I pronounced that incorrectly –
[Collective attempts to pronounce “Obergefell”]
HOSTIN: Which is the right to same-sex marriage. But he did not talk about Loving v. the United States [sic].
BEHAR: No, Loving he didn’t bring up.
SUNNY: Which was interracial marriage.
GOLDBERG: No, but I'm telling you, when he spoke about all the things that could go, this was one of the things he brought up. You all brought it up at the table several weeks ago.
(…)
11:15:55
GOLDBERG: So we've got a couple of things here. The first thing I want to do is when we were talking about Loving v. Virginia, this is what Clarence said. He said his concurring opinion is, “we should reconsider all of the court's substantive due process precedents including Griswold,” and then he went on to name them. When you say “all,” I think you're talking -- I think you're talking about all of them and you're not playing. You know?
(…)
11:19:54 a.m. Eastern
HOSTIN: Well, when you elect a president like the former, twice impeached, disgraced President Trump, and he gets to nominate three -- I think it was three --
SARA HAINES: Three.
HOSTIN: -- Supreme Court justices, this is what you’re left with.
GOLDBERG [Interrupting]: Well, it wasn't even a nomination, really. They just put them through.
HOSTIN: They were rubber-stamped.
GOLDBERG: They just kind of put them through and sat they there and said – and lied through their teeth.
(…)
