A separate source said the emails were part of a stretch of messages provided to the committee after a federal judge ruled that Eastman’s correspondence was relevant to the work of the committee investigating former President Donald Trump and efforts to nullify the election. 2020 presidential elections in the months leading up to January 6.
Thomas did not respond to a CNN request for comment. Lawyers for Eastman declined to comment, as did a spokesman for the House select committee.
Democratic Rep. Pete Aguilar of California, a member of the committee, would not confirm that he was in possession of the emails, but told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Wednesday night that the hearings would include only content that the committee thought was specific to. the focus of your research.
“The committee will have no qualms about seeking additional information from people who have information relevant to the investigation,” Aguilar told Cooper in response to a question about Thomas’s addition to the committee’s hearings.
“We’re not talking details, but these hearings are pretty tight and close, and we look forward to putting this puzzle together for the American public and sharing what we know to date,” the California Democrat continued.
Clarence Thomas has participated in Supreme Court cases related to the 2020 election controversies and, in a February 2021 opinion, dissented when the full court declined to challenge Pennsylvania’s mail-in voting procedures. He demonstrated his support for the claim that voter fraud is a threat to the United States.
“We are fortunate that many of the cases we have seen allege only inappropriate rule changes, not fraud. But that observation provides only small comfort,” she wrote. “An election free of strong evidence of systemic fraud is not enough on its own to build electoral confidence.” No other judge joined his opinion.
Last January, Thomas dissented only when the court allowed the National Archives to turn over thousands of Trump White House documents to the Jan. 6 committee about the former president’s attempt to assert executive privilege.
Thomas has refused to recuse himself in cases related to the 2020 election.
The sources said the House select committee has contemplated making Ginni Thomas’s role in trying to nullify the election part of its investigation, but has yet to call her to testify or issue a subpoena.
NYT: Eastman claimed information on Supreme Court infighting over taking 2020 election case
In an exchange on December 24, 2020, John Eastman discussed the alleged infighting in an email to Kenneth Chesebro and Trump campaign officials, hoping it would encourage Supreme Court justices to hear a election case, the Times reported, citing two people briefed on the content of the email.
“So the odds are not based on the legal merits, but on an assessment of the judges’ spine, and I understand there is a heated fight going on,” Eastman allegedly wrote, referring to the process in which at least four judges to take office. case. He added, “For those who are willing to do their duty, we should help them by giving them a Wisconsin certificate petition to add to the mix.”
According to the Times, Chesebro responded, “The odds for action before January 6 will be more favorable if the justices begin to fear there will be ‘wild’ chaos on January 6 unless they rule by then, anyway.”
The exchange was part of a group of emails obtained by the House select committee investigating unrest at the US Capitol, the Times said, and came days after Trump himself called a protest” Savage” at the Ellipse near the White House. January 6, 2021, the day on which the certification of electoral votes was set by Congress.
CNN has not confirmed the report and it is unclear what actual knowledge, if any, Eastman had of the deliberations among the Supreme Court justices.
CNN has reached out to the Supreme Court for comment, and the Jan. 6 committee declined to comment Wednesday night. Chesebro and an attorney for Eastman did not respond to Times requests for comment.
In the email exchange, there was a request that the Trump campaign pay for the effort to bring a case to the high court and it may have been denied, the Times also reported.
Asked about the email exchange, Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democrat and a member of the Jan. 6 committee, said Thursday that the email “suggests there were at least some people maneuvering in right-wing legal circles.” to try to pressure the Supreme Court. Court in action”.
Raskin also told CNN’s “New Day” that if there is evidence of Eastman’s comments about what was going on between Supreme Court justices, “we will report that he said that.”
“That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true,” Raskin cautioned. “He could have been lying about what he knew on the inside. On the other hand, maybe he had some back channel connection to the Supreme Court, and we want to find out if that’s true. People who were backchanneling the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, the Three Percenters, and the domestic violent extremist movement also had a backchannel, in a way, with the Supreme Court of the United States of America.”