Thread by @clearing_fog

John Eastman is the father of the fraudulent electors scheme.

Twenty years ago, before SCOTUS stepped in, the Florida GOP was planning to use it to nullify their citizens' votes if Al Gore won the election.

And Eastman was helping them plan it.

A thread 🧵
/1

As the 2000 election went into recounts and state Supreme Court battles in FL, the Republican Party was very concerned that Gore might win, and they threw the kitchen sink at stopping it.

SCOTUS eventually stepped in, overriding the FL Supreme Court to stop the count.

But...
/2

... if SCOTUS had not stepped in, the FL Republican Party was preparing to invalidate the results of the election.

On November 29, they invited speakers to a hearing, where they discussed the possibility of an 'alternate' slate of electors.

And they brought in a ringer.

/3

At the Nov 29 hearing, citizens urged legislators not to hold a special session. Several lawyers warned that legislative selection of presidential electors would set a dangerous Constitutional precedent.

The GOP-controlled legislature saved the final word for John Eastman.

/4

Eastman, when asked for his credentials to weigh in on the Electoral College, didn't need to be very convincing.

"The Electoral College is part of that structural foundation... um... that is part of the underlying principle and theory of our whole constitutional system. Um.
/5

After a lackluster introduction, Eastman begins his hard sell, condescending to the lawmakers, explaining that this is uncharted territory, and they must be nervous, but not to worry, because he was there to let them know they were more powerful than the Supreme Court.

/6

Interestingly, Eastman cited McPherson v. Blacker, implying that it provides precedent for everything that he was about to tell them that day.

Of course, that isn't true.

It did confirm the plenary power, but that wasn't the argument he was there to make.

/7

While McPherson did affirm that state legislatures have full control (plenary power) over how the state decides to choose its electors, it absolutely does not state that they can suddenly and unilaterally decide to change those electors in the middle of an election.

/8

After the fraudulent electors scheme was attempted in 2020, this was clarified by mutiple people - including the Republican House Speaker of Arizona, and the Attorney General of PA in SCOTUS filings.

gilaherald.com/speaker-bowers…

supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/2…

/9

Eastman's arguments to justify this scheme have no merit - and they never had any merit.

Of course, he knew this even in 2000, which is why he used bluster and a barrage of confusing jargon in an attempt to pave the way for the scheme to proceed under color of authority.

/10

Eastman closed his blustery statement that day by forcefully telling the FL legislature that no one could stop them from what they wanted to do with their state electors, because they had a plenary 'judging ability' in all matters elector-related.

/11

This may seem like ancient history, but it is important - for at least two reasons.

First...

/12

It tells us that the Republican Party's contempt for democracy has nothing to do with Trump - and so it will remain even after he is gone.

David Frum - George W. Bush's speechwriter tried to tell us this in 2018. He would know.

theatlantic.com/politics/archi…
/13

Secondly, it gives us more insight into what Eastman - and Republican Party organs - are still doing today.

Only a month ago, Eastman was in Wisconsin, pushing legislators to use their 'power' to declare that the election was "illegally certified."

/14

https://twitter.com/clayberg/status/1504888349072441346?s=20&t=0eXtV4pAVMcXDl_dVScEdQ

And like in FL in 2000, the GOP threw the kitchen sink at 2020.

The fraudulent electors scheme was only one piece - and that was Eastman’s baby.

He led them to believe it would work, and people are likely going to face prison time for it.

He needs to prove he was “right.”

https://twitter.com/lawindsor/status/1513929147088789512

Addendum - adding links for sources that weren't already included inline.

C-Span video of the Nov 29 FL hearing (h/t @cuzkristoff): c-span.org/video/?160847-…

Bush v. Gore decision: courtlistener.com/opinion/118395…

FL 2000 Timeline: cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITI…

@chantler_jaki @RickPetree As to why the false electors didn’t make the news, well, since they didn’t end up needing to try it (thanks to SCOTUS), hardly anyone even knew about those FL legislative sessions.

Although CNN did include it in their timeline, which is where that screenshot came from.