Trump has filed to intervene in Texas' attempt to overturn the US election. But who REALLY wrote his lawsuit? Let's find out. supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/2…
According to the metadata, Trump's legal intervention wasn't written by John Eastman, the Counsel of Record. It was written by someone else: Lawrence Joseph.
Who is Lawrence Joseph? Well, he's one of the lawyers in the original Texas complaint, listed as the "Special Counsel to the Attorney General of Texas".
The metadata of the Texas SCOTUS complaint itself also features Lawrence Joseph, alongside Aaron Reitz, the Texas Deputy AG who was just promoted into his job two weeks ago.
Texas media reported that Lawrence Joseph seems to have been hired in as an outside attorney for this, instead of Texas Solicitor General Kyle Hawkins texastribune.org/2020/12/08/tex…
I suspect that he's Larry Joseph, a DC-based conservative lawyer larryjoseph.com
Larry Joseph has backed Trump at the Supreme Court before, filing an Amicus in Trump v Vance on behalf of conservative lobby group "Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund" supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/1…
And in Trump v New York, an Amicus on Trump's side for the Immigration Law Reform Institute... there are probably more of these but you get the idea.
Anyway, perhaps it's fairly typical for the filings from plaintiffs and amici to be actually written by the same lawyer? So maybe this isn't nefarious, I don't know. But it's interesting anyway.
In any case, Joseph is probably better than Trump's *official* counsel of record, who pushed Kamala Harris birther nonsense.
btw, my computer uses a global date format (dd/mm/yyyy), not a US format. That's why the dates look weird to Americans. They weren't written in September.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Trumpworld is excited: Breitbart is reporting that the State of Texas has filed suit against MI, PA, WI and GA in the Supreme Court in an attempt to get the election results tossed out in those states.
This lawsuit ticks a lot of Trump boxes:
🟣As a dispute between states, it starts out in SCOTUS
🟣It seeks to put enough EVs in play to swing the whole election result
🟣It's the 'big beautiful lawsuit' Trump has wanted all along
Breitbart hasn't published the actual complaint, and it doesn't appear to be anywhere else yet, but we can say some things about it from their reporting:
The GOP's problem now is that their base will never accept any of them recognising Biden as President. Not on December 14, not on Jan 6, not on Inauguration Day.
GOP Senators and Congress members have missed the chance to jump of the crazy train. The longer they deny Biden's win, the more unacceptable they make it to ever acknowledge him.
A proportion of the elected GOP will outright claim that Biden isn't President, even after Jan 21. That's going to have consequences.
Four days after @JennaEllisEsq announced "On to SCOTUS!", the Trump Campaign has not yet petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the appeal to the 3rd Circuit's denial. The Safe Harbour deadline is in just 7 days.
@JennaEllisEsq In those 7 days, the Trump Campaign has to:
1. Get SCOTUS to grant cert 2. Argue to SCOTUS that the 3rd Circuit's denial of their motion to amend should be overturned.
3. Argue their amended motion at MDPA before Brann, who's already made it clear he will toss the case for moot/standing/badness
3 weeks ago, the idea of calling for state legislatures to ignore the election results was fringe nuttiness. Today, Trump and his lawyers are loudly demanding it.
Online Pro-Trump spaces were happy to wait for SCOTUS to "overturn" the result. As they begin to understand that won't happen, more of them are calling for a coup too.