Whoa. Chief justice of the Ohio Supreme Court after the state GOP criticized a lower-court judge for siding with Dems in a lawsuit to allow more dropboxes in the state>>
For reference, here's what the Ohio Republican Party said yesterday. Their lawyers today told the judge they had no idea this was out there, that it's now scrubbed from the internet.
(This is the version Ohio Dems submitted to court to suggest the Ohio GOP gets held in contempt)
"The Republican Party’s statement should be seen for what it is: part of a continuing string of attacks against any [court] decision that doesn’t favor a political end, regardless of party, even if that decision may be legally correct and indeed legally required."
<<This quote is from Maureen O'Connor, Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court
She's also the former Lieutenant Governor of Ohio. And yes, a Republican.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We wanted a better understanding of what the special counsel's investigation around Jan 6 + the Mar-a-Lago documents looked like. Here's what we found...
Specifically asking witnesses whether there was a plan to steal the election and for Trump not to concede, and what Trump knew and believed heading into the Jan 6 riot
>>There's a long-running Jan 6 financial investigation that's largely flown under the radar
Former DC fraud/public corruption head JP Cooney is leading it. Now looking at possible misuse of political contributions, but this part of probe has checked out a lot of financial issues
Happening now: Jay Bratt +DOJ prosecutors in a sealed hearing w Trump lawyers before Chief Judge Howell in DC. It’s about holding Donald Trump in contempt re: classified docs subpoena.
12+ reporters, our lawyer @CTobinJD waiting outside the courtroom, asking for public access
-Late last week, DOJ moved to compel more grand jury testimony from Pat Cipollone, Patrick Philbin in Jan 6 probe
-That comes after BOTH Greg Jacob, Marc Short from VP office were compelled after court fight
John Eastman is in court right now trying to challenge a House Jan 6 subpoena for ~19,000 of his emails, including ones related to Trump
So far:
-Chapman U, his employer, says he worked for Trump w/o permission
-His lawyer says he was working for Trump at MANY relevant moments
Judge David Carter nails down if he was doing work on behalf of client, when Eastman:
-briefed hundreds of state leg
-was at the Willard
-met w Trump & Pence Jan 3
Yes. The client was Trump, Eastman's lawyer answered.
Eight people have gone to court so far to try to block the House Select Committee's pursuit of information.
The latest: Michael Flynn
I dove into his complaint tonight, and how it fits among the other lawsuits/House subpoenas. cnn.com/2021/12/21/pol…
Flynn's lawsuit arrives 1 day after he was scheduled to testify to the House--and appears to be trying to hold off the consequence of his failure to appear
Flynn says he's challenging a subpoena to Verizon (that he assumes exists), and trying to assert his 5th
Amendment rights
One thing about all this talk of the Fifth Amendment in response to the House: You're only able to employ it during testimony or some sort of communicated response.
You can't plead the 5th to block the House getting info from, say, Verizon (as some of the these lawsuits try)