On Thursday afternoon, during a hearing largely devoted to outlining Eastman’s role in what the committee described as a plot to steal the presidency, he posted online a copy of an email he said Thomas sent him on 4 December 2020. The email showed Thomas invited him to speak Dec. 8 at Frontliners, which she described as “a group of grassroots state leaders.”
In an accompanying statement sent to substackthe online news site, Eastman tried to play down the significance of the invitation, saying Thomas had asked him to give an “update on election litigation to a group he meets with regularly.” She wrote that she did not discuss with Thomas or her husband “any matter pending or that may come before the court.”
Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the House committee, said Thursday that the committee had sent a letter requesting an interview with Thomas. Thomas told the curator daily call that he looks forward to speaking with the committee and “can’t wait to clear up misconceptions.”
The content of his December 4 invitation to Eastman appears to match the content of messages recently described by a federal judge as pertinent to the committee’s investigation into the effort to nullify the 2020 election by pressuring key states won by Joe. Biden to certify candidate lists. presidential electors who would vote for Trump.
US District Judge David O. Carter last week ordered Eastman to release more than 100 emails and other records, overturning Eastman’s claims that those communications were privileged and should be protected. Among them were 10 documents related to meetings in December 2020 of a group that Eastman had described as “civic-minded citizens with a conservative viewpoint who meet semi-regularly to socialize and discuss issues of public interest.” Two of those documents were emails inviting Eastman to speak at a group meeting on Dec. 8, Carter wrote. They were sent by the “high-profile leader” of the group, he wrote.
Two other documents contained the agenda for the meeting, which showed Eastman discussed not election litigation but “state legislative action that may reverse the media-called Joe Biden pick.” The fact that Eastman, former secretary to Clarence Thomas, communicated with the judge’s wife about the attempts to reverse the election result has intensified questions about whether Clarence Thomas faces a conflict of interest in deciding the cases related to the election of 2020 and attempts to subvert it. .
Neither Eastman nor Ginni Thomas responded to a request for comment. A Supreme Court spokeswoman did not respond to questions from Clarence Thomas.
The other documents Eastman was ordered to turn over contained agendas for two more group meetings, the judge wrote. Carter wrote that the December 9 agenda included a section titled “‘GROUND GAME Following November 4 Election Results,’ during which a member of Congress discussed a ‘[p]lan to challenge constituents in the House of Representatives.’” The Dec. 16 agenda included a section in which a Trump constituent discussed “The Constitutional Implications of the Electoral College Meeting and What Follows.”
Carter felt the documents should be released because they were of “substantial interest” to the House committee since the meetings “furthered a fundamental goal of the Jan. 6 plan: to have battleground states certify alternative lists of electors for the president.” Trump.”
Reference-www.washingtonpost.com