A century in the making

THE LATEST ON JAN. 6
By Lisa Desjardins, @LisaDNews
Correspondent

If you are reading this newsletter, I suspect you are like those of us who write it: hungry for basic information and facts. We savor those things like a favorite meal. (For me, currently, that’s a homemade pot of zuppa Toscana.)

But history serves up knowledge on its own timeline. Often in a sudden platter – or burst! – of news.

This seems to be where we are now regarding the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The past week has brought a few new bits of knowledge and arguments.

We thought it a good time for an update.

Ginni Thomas

Led by the reporting of Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, several outlets reported last week that Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, sent more than 20 text messages advocating for efforts to overturn the 2020 election to Mark Meadows while he was chief of staff to former President Donald Trump.

Here’s a quick summary of what has been reported:

How we got here. The messages were among more than 2,300 texts Meadows voluntarily turned over to the Jan. 6 committee. He later ceased cooperation.
What Ginni Thomas sent. The committee has 21 text messages from Thomas to Meadows. All but one came in November 2020, after the election. The other text is dated Jan. 10, 2021.
“The greatest Heist.” Thomas implored Meadows to try to overturn the election results, expressing deep fear, praising disproven conspiracy theorists and referring to Biden’s win as “the greatest Heist of our History” and a “coup.”
Criticism of Pence. After Jan. 6, Thomas criticized then-Vice President Mike Pence, who rejected the idea that he could block the election result. She wrote, “Most of us are disgusted with the VP and are in listening mode to see where to fight with our teams. Those who attacked the Capitol are not representative of our great teams of patriots for DJT!!”
What about Justice Thomas? The texts never mention Justice Thomas.
“Best friend.” Ginni Thomas at one point refers to a related conversation with her “best friend,” but does not name that figure. Justice Thomas has referred to his wife as his best friend in the past. But there is no specific indication that Ginni Thomas meant her husband in these texts.

In addition, Ginni Thomas has said she was at the “Stop the Steal” rally that occurred before the insurrection on Jan. 6, but that she did not stay long and did not have a role in helping organize it.

The discussion happening now:

No response from either Thomas. Neither Justice Thomas nor Ginni Thomas has issued a statement or responded to requests regarding the texts.
Will the committee ask for testimony? Several outlets now report that the Jan. 6 committee plans to ask Ginni Thomas to voluntarily testify.
Calls for recusal. Some Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., are calling for Justice Thomas to recuse himself from cases related to Jan. 6.
The recusal question. Whether Justice Thomas has a conflict of interest because of his wife’s advocacy with the White House as the court has been involved in legal cases regarding the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 investigation.
What are the rules here? There is no code of ethics for the Supreme Court. Justices choose to recuse or not, weighing their own judicial values and public perception of their actions.
Is this impeachable? Supreme Court justices can be impeached. As with presidential impeachment, there is no clear standard for what is impeachable. A Supreme Court impeachment has happened only once, in 1805. Justice Samuel Chase was impeached, charged with overstepping his role as a judge and acting as a partisan prosecutor. He was acquitted in the Senate and returned to the bench.

There are other stories regarding Jan. 6 making headlines this week as well.

Trump phone records

Seven-hour phone gap. Thanks to more sleuthing from the Woodward and Costa team, the Washington Post reports there is a more than seven-hour gap in which White House records show no direct phone calls to or from Trump on Jan. 6, 2021.
Trump did speak on the phone during that time. Statements from lawmakers and other reporting make it clear that Trump did communicate with people via the phone during that hourslong stretch.
Committee questions. The committee is reportedly investigating whether Trump used other phones or back channels to communicate.

A notable district judge order

A federal judge in California yesterday ruled that Trump advisor John Eastman must turn over 101 documents, all from the days immediately before and after the insurrection, to the House Jan. 6 committee.

Who is Eastman again? John Eastman is a legal scholar known for pushing the generally rejected idea that a vice president could refuse to certify an election, and that then-Vice President Pence should have done that on Jan. 6.
One sidenote. It happens that Eastman clerked for Justice Thomas in the mid-1990s. We do not know of, nor mean to imply any connection of his case to Thomas, but it’s a quirk of these news stories that caught our attention.
What does this ruling do? This ruling rejects Eastman’s arguments that his documents were privileged communication with and about Trump. That may be the extent of its effect though; it is specific to the privilege claims in this case. In addition, this order does not affect other criminal or civil cases. But, Judge Carter clearly had some hypothetical thoughts about those, written as he evaluated whether the overall Jan. 6 investigation involving Eastman had merit. (See below.)
Corrupt obstruction of justice. Carter wrote, “Based on the evidence, the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.” Similarly, Carter found that Eastman and Trump conspired. Again, that does not affect any other proceedings, but is a blunt statement from a bench.
A warning. At the end of his order, Judge Carter wrote, “... This case is a warning about the dangers of ‘legal theories’ gone wrong, the powerful abusing public platforms, and desperation to win at all costs. If Dr. Eastman and President Trump’s plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution. If the country does not commit to investigating and pursuing accountability for those responsible, the Court fears January 6 will repeat itself.”

The ongoing investigation

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice continues with its investigation, an effort it has called one of the largest in U.S. history.

Charges: As March 6, 2022, DOJ had arrested and is prosecuting 775 people for involvement in the Jan. 6 attack.
Most serious charges: Of those, more than 80 are charged with the most serious offense: using a weapon to injure an officer.
Guilty pleas: 224 people have pleaded guilty, most of them for misdemeanor charges.
Sentences: More than 110 people have seen their cases fully adjudicated and have been sentenced for their actions on Jan. 6. Fifty of those sentences include prison time. The longest of those sentences so far is up to 63 months.

RECKONING WITH ONE OF AMERICA’S MOST HORRIFIC LEGACIES