A trove of text messages that former President Trump's top aide handed
over to the January six Select committee have revealed an unexpected
player in the effort to overturn the 2020 election results.
Lisa Desjardin, explains Judy. The House Select Committee is looking
at more than 2000 text messages provided by former Trump Chief of
staff Mark Meadows at issue here.
29 reported texts between Meadows and Ginny Thomas, the wife of Supreme
Court Justice Clarence Thomas. She's long been a conservative activist.
The messages reviewed by CNN, CBS and The Washington Post show she
pushed the Trump White House to fight the results of the 2020 election
after it was called for Joe Biden.
On November 10th. She texted Meadows help this great president stand
firm. The majority knows Biden and the left is attempting the greatest
heist of our history in her words per those reported text. At the
same time, Trump was appealing directly to the Supreme Court to intervene
on his behalf. He tweeted on November 6th. I easily win the presidency
of the United States with legal votes cast.
U S. Supreme Court should decide.
Jane Mayer of The New Yorker has reported on Ginny Thomas, her activism
and the Supreme Court and she joins me Now I feel right at the top.
Of course, we all know that the presidential election was settled
law it was legally held, and Joe Biden was the winner.
Looking at these texts that three outlets have confirmed for us,
Jane Overall, what is the wife of the justice saying in these texts
to the chief of staff to the president?
Well, she's she's arguing that the 2020 election was what she calls
the greatest heist in American history. Um, and that the results
that
We're certified where a fraud and that it had to be stopped and that
the chief of staff Mark Meadows to Trump had to step in.
And do something to try to
trump in office. These texts don't mention justice Thomas by name,
and both Justice Thomas and Ginny Thomas have said that they keep
their work separate.
But I do want to raise one text that people are looking at first
attacks from chief of Staff Meadows, he wrote. This is a fight of
good versus evil. Evil always looks like the victor until the king
of Kings triumphs.
Ginny Thomas responded. Thank you needed that this plus a conversation
with my best friend just now. We do not know who that best friend
was. We know that she and her husband have referred to each other
as best friend in the past.
I want to ask you first of all broadly to get our hands around this
are there legal and ethical issues here for Supreme Court justice.
What are the rules for Supreme Court justice in this area of potential
conflict of interest?
Well, so I've been reporting on this and interviewing several of
the country's foremost experts on judicial ethics and what is fascinating
about this. This new material is that several of these ethics experts
on the law said
That Clarence Thomas and Ginny Thomas in these particular situations
have crossed the red lines. And what are the red lines? Well, the
Supreme Court, as we know, is not found by the judicial code of ethics
that applies to all other federal judges, and in the lower courts,
the Supreme Court sort of self
Enforces its own ethics code. But it is found by U S law. There is
us the U. S statute that says that any judge and any justice
Has to step aside from any case in which their spouse has an interest
in the outcome of proceedings. And what these these
Ethics experts have said to me is that you look at these emails and
you can't but see that you need. Thomas had
A interest in in the proceeding that was in front of Clarence Thomas,
which was about whether this kind of material and um and more material
from President Trump would ever surface and see the light of day
and that's what was the issue being argued in front of the court
with Clarence Thomas sat on.
Um, in January, he didn't recuse himself, even though it seems now
in looking over this material that his his wife's involvement in
the plot to overturn the 2020 election.
Stood in a good chance of coming out, Um, depending on
How the court ruled in that proceeding. Mark Meadows attorney did
put out a statement saying that there is nothing illegal in these
texts.
The biggest question at this moment. For now, we'll see where this
goes. This is just the beginning of this story is whether Justice
Thomas should recuse himself going forward, especially on January
6th related cases just to wrap this up where we are now.
Jane. That choice is entirely up to him. Is that right? Well it in
there in the past in in our history, chief justices have sometimes
pressured justices to step aside. That has happened before And in
this case, we have these judicial
Ethics experts such as Stephen Gillers, a professor at U who's saying
the Clarence Thomas just must step aside from and recused from any
cases that would have to do with the January six uprisings and the
efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
It's up to Clarence Thomas, of course, at the end of the day, but
there's sort of a rising pressure. I would say on him to recuse in
these cases. Well, we hope to hear from Justice Thomas in the days
ahead and thank you for talking to us tonight. Jane Mayer of the
New Yorker.