最新杏吧原创

It was Dec. 8 at 6:11 p.m., and one of Schmitt鈥檚 top aides, Solicitor General John Sauer, was sending an email to dozens of Republican attorneys general or their staff members throughout the country asking them to sign off on supporting the lawsuit filed by the state of Texas challenging the election results in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin.

In short order, the U.S. Supreme Court the lawsuit as having no merit. But by simply offering a legal challenge that supported former President Donald Trump鈥檚 Big Lie that the election had been stolen from him, Schmitt and his counterparts fueled the fire of the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Jon Western is going to be one of the people who writes this history. He鈥檚 a political science professor in Massachusetts. Western is studying the rise of anti-Democratic movements in Europe and the U.S. So when he saw Schmitt and other Republican attorneys general trying to overturn the election, he wanted to know the story behind such a betrayal of office.

It was the Texas lawsuit, and the amicus brief, eventually signed on to by 21 other states, that gave rise to members of Congress, including Sen. Josh Hawley, the Missouri Republican, announcing their intentions to further challenge the election results on the fateful day when the insurrectionists stormed the Capitol.

Western filed Sunshine Law requests in December with the states that signed on to Schmitt鈥檚 amicus brief. What he found, in records he obtained from North Dakota, Utah, Florida and others, is that Schmitt鈥檚 aide, Sauer, led the effort.

Missouri, a state that has long had Sunshine Law compliance issues, in part because attorneys general of both parties have failed to take the public accountability law seriously, didn鈥檛 provide Western the records, even though Sauer鈥檚 emails are prevalent in the documents he obtained from other states.

I asked Schmitt鈥檚 office why it didn鈥檛 provide the Sauer emails to Western. A spokesman said in an email that the attorney general鈥檚 office 鈥渃losed certain records.鈥� In the letter responding to Western, the attorney general cited the legal exception section of the Sunshine Law, which allows certain 鈥渃onfidential鈥� records between an attorney and its public governmental body to be closed. Western can鈥檛 imagine that exception applies in this case.

Neither did several other states.

Western, it turns out, wasn鈥檛 the only person denied records that clearly exist. (He provided me the North Dakota emails, which include the ones from Sauer organizing the states to sign on to the amicus brief). Clayton attorney Mark Pedroli, founder of the Sunshine and Accountability Project, and his client, lawyer Elad Gross, filed Sunshine Law requests in January that also would have encompassed the Sauer emails, including a specific request for all correspondence related to the amicus brief. The records were not provided, nor was a suggestion that they were closed.

When Pedroli found out that Western obtained the Missouri records from another state, he called the professor, who provided him the Sauer emails. There is no doubt, Pedroli says, that the records should have been provided to him under his request.

鈥淚magine my surprise when I heard someone requesting the same records in North Dakota got more Missouri emails than we got from direct requests to Missouri,鈥� Pedroli told me. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a high-water mark for evasion and lawlessness when you have to go to North Dakota to get Missouri records.鈥�

The existence of the Missouri records in other states鈥� responses to document requests raises two uncomfortable questions for Schmitt, who, like his predecessor Hawley did, is using the high profile of the office to run for the U.S. Senate: How much responsibility should he bear for planting the seeds of insurrection, and why is he covering up his role?

Western is mostly concerned with the first question. The records themselves show, he says, that the attorneys general knew they were engaged in a political fraud, and that鈥檚 damaging for the future of democracy. In one email, for instance, an aide to North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem makes it clear the amicus brief has little basis in law.

鈥淭he decision whether we join this amicus is more political than it is legal,鈥� wrote the aide.

That鈥檚 what worries Western. 鈥淵ou have the leading law enforcement officers in these states promulgating a fiction, and knowingly so,鈥� Western says. According to his research, at least 11 of the states that signed Schmitt鈥檚 amicus brief actually had similar election practices to the states that they were objecting to. 鈥淭he attorneys general know exactly what is going on here. They know there was no widespread fraud in these states.鈥�

The Big Lie persists because attorneys general like Schmitt gave it life.

It鈥檚 鈥渞eally disturbing,鈥� Western says, that the attorneys general would legitimize the former president鈥檚 electoral fantasy. It鈥檚 equally disturbing, Pedroli says, that, at least in Schmitt鈥檚 case, he would try to cover it up.

鈥淭he documents not only showcase Missouri鈥檚 leading role in the insurrectionist rhetoric that led to January 6th, but also demonstrate the use of state taxpayer dollars for a purely political, partisan agenda,鈥� Pedroli says. 鈥淭heir attempt to hide the records now is tantamount to an admission of guilt.鈥�