We have seen a lot of unprecedented stuff in the “Trump Era” of American politics. The first violent transfer of power is the most critical, obviously.
But we can now add another bizarre “first.” According to Axios, the House Select Committee (Article I branch) will call Ginni Thomas to testify about her communications with John Eastman, Mark Meadows, and – likely, Donald Trump, all in the Article II Executive Branch, while – of course, married to a SCOTUS Justice, the highest position created within Article III and a position that is supposed to be above politics. It took Trump to create a scenario where a hearing must involve close ties to all three branches.
Axios says that Ginni Thomas is happy to testify to clear some stuff up. She might want to bring an attorney:
Thomas told the Daily Caller she would agree to an interview. “I can’t wait to clear up misconceptions. I look forward to talking to them,” she said.
Why it matters: The decision comes after public and private wavering among committee members in recent weeks over the importance of Thomas’ role in Jan. 6 and former President Trump’s efforts to overturn the election.
Thomas played an active role in pushing then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to take measures to help overturn the 2020 election results, according to texts obtained by the Washington Post and CBS News. The committee had reportedly been leaning against inviting Thomas to testify as recently as last month.
Why would the Committee have leaned against inviting Thomas to testify even though her texts and discussions pop up in Meadows’s texts and Eastman’s emails? Perhaps because it is so unprecedented. Perhaps because the Select Committee believed it could get everything it needed from Meadows and Eastman. The Committee would also worry about looking like it’s overreaching.
But as this site reported this morning, there’s been a fundamental change now that the Committee has evidence that John Eastman told a colleague that there were heated fights going on within the SCOTUS and that there were some Justices who were open to hearing appeals out of Wisconsin and that – even though the case had no legal merit, the Justices might have the “spine” to do their duty, implying ruling against the law and for Trump. Axios states:
Other emails, reported by the New York Times, reveal that Eastman messaged a pro-Trump lawyer claiming to have insight into a “heated fight” between Supreme Court justices over whether to hear an election case.
And the quote this site used this morning:
“So the odds are not based on the legal merits but an assessment of the justices’ spines, and I understand that there is a heated fight underway,” Mr. Eastman wrote, according to the people briefed on the contents of the email. Referring to the process by which at least four justices are needed to take up a case, he added, “For those willing to do their duty, we should help them by giving them a Wisconsin cert petition to add into the mix.”
And that is why the Committee must speak to Ginni Thomas. Ginni was the one in contact with Eastman. Perhaps Eastman was puffing up his theory a bit, maybe engaging in some serious hyperbole. But if Eastman did hear of real fights that occurred within the SCOTUS and if there were Justices that believed they had the spine or the duty to hear and overrule the Wisconsin cases, that information likely came from Ginni, and she must now testify.
Eastman’s words in the NYTimes paragraph are some of the most chilling of the investigation. The SCOTUS must remain as non-political as possible. Eastman’s chilling words about SCOTUS partisanship point almost inarguably to Ginni Thomas. Ginni best bring a lawyer.
Jason Miciak believes a day without learning is a day not lived. He is a political writer, features writer, author, and attorney. He is a Canadian-born dual citizen who spent his teen and college years in the Pacific Northwest and has since lived in seven states. He now enjoys life as a single dad of a young girl, writing from the beaches of the Gulf Coast. He loves crafting his flower pots, cooking, while also studying scientific philosophy, religion, and non-math principles behind quantum mechanics and cosmology. Please feel free to contact for speaking engagements or any concerns.
