Trump Lawyer Suggested ‘Conspiratorial’ Action by Clarence Thomas—Attorney

Former President Donald Trump’s lawyer suggested a “conspiratorial” action by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarance Thomas in his federal election subversion case, according to attorney and legal analyst Glenn Kirschner on Friday.

In a case brought on by Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith, Trump stands accused of four felonies related to his claims that the 2020 election was stolen, leading up to the siege on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. On that fateful day, a violent mob of Trump supporters stormed the capitol building in a failed attempt to stop Congress from certifying President-elect Joe Biden’s election victory. There is no evidence to suggest widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election. Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges and claims the case is politically motivated against him.

During a pre-trial hearing on Thursday in Washington, D.C., for Trump’s case, the GOP presidential nominee’s lawyer, John Lauro, corrected himself after saying that Thomas had “directed” him to challenge Smith’s authority in the case.

Kirschner, a former assistant U.S. attorney and frequent Trump critic who has been closely watching and commenting on the federal case, said in a Friday YouTube video that if Thomas did direct Trump’s team to challenge Smith’s authority “that would be improper, unethical, conspiratorial even.”

“I know everybody would be shocked to find that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas did something improper, unethical or conspiratorial,” Kirschner said sarcastically.

Lauro told Newsweek via email on Saturday morning: “Once again the far left media is making up false issues: During oral argument, I specifically referred to Justice Thomas’ concurring opinion and the suggestion that we should file the motion to disqualify Jack Smith promptly. “

Newsweek has reached out to Kirschner via email as well as the DOJ and the Supreme Court via online form for comment on Saturday morning.

Thomas and Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, both conservative judges, have recently been under fire over ethical concerns stemming from undisclosed gifts and perceived biases in cases involving Trump and attempts to overturn the 2020 election, which both justices have not recused themselves from.

In July, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a New York Democrat, filed articles of impeachment against Thomas and Alito over these ethical concerns. However, it is almost certain to fail in the Republican-controlled House.

The articles for Thomas cover a wide range of behavior, from reportedly taking gifts from his billionaire friend and Republican megadonor, Harlan Crow, to not recusing himself from cases in which his wife, Virginia, “Ginni” Thomas, “had an interest.”

Ginni Thomas told Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows in the wake of Trump’s 2020 election loss that he should encourage the then-president not to concede to President-elect Biden, according to text messages obtained by the House select committee tasked with investigating the Capitol riot.

Thomas’ wife later told the committee that her husband “was completely unaware” of her text message exchange with Meadows “until this Committee leaked them to the press.”

At a judicial conference in Alabama in early May, Thomas said, “My wife and I, the last two or three years, just the nastiness and the lies,” without explaining what instances he was referring to. “There’s certainly been a lot of negativity in our lives, my wife and I, over the last few years, but we choose not to focus on it,” he added.

Thomas has also previously stated that the gifts from Crow were “not reportable.”

What Did Trump’s Lawyer Say in Court?

In court on Thursday, Lauro referenced a note from Thomas that he wrote in the concurrence regarding the Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity.

Thomas wrote in the note that “if this unprecedented prosecution [of Trump] is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people.”

The note was used by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Trump in 2020, when she tossed the former president’s classified documents case, arguing that Smith’s appointment was “unconstitutional.”

Smith was also leading the prosecution in the classified documents case in which Trump was accused of mishandling sensitive material upon his departure from the White House and then obstructing the government’s efforts at retrieving them. The dismissal of the Florida case is facing an appeal and Trump maintains his innocence in the case.

Lauro cited the same reasoning as Cannon at the hearing on Thursday, saying that the court must decide on the issue of the special counsel’s authority “in light of Justice Thomas’ interest” in it.

Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the federal election case, told Lauro that she didn’t find Cannon’s decision very persuasive, to which the defense replied that Thomas had “directed” him to raise the issue.

“He directed you to do it?” Chutkan asked to which Lauro quickly clarified, “Well, he didn’t direct us to.”

The judge said that Thomas’ concurrence was not binding and that there was precedent in the D.C. Circuit upholding the constitutionality of special counsel appointments.