Texas Republican Representative Dan Crenshaw came under fire for his support of a lawsuit demanding certain states' votes be overturned for the purpose of handing Donald Trump a second term despite losing the popular vote by over 7 million votes.
As with all the other lawsuits, it didn't seek to negate any state or local election results on the same ballots that Republicans won.
Crenshaw took to Twitter Friday morning to explain his decision to sign onto an amicus brief in support of the lawsuit, Texas vs. Pennsylvania et. al., which asked the Supreme Court to throw out some votes cast only for President-elect Joe Biden last month in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin. Any votes for Republican candidates or Trump would—of course—be kept.
You can read his explanation here.
The left-wing outrage is predictably over the top. The request here is simple: allow this case to be elevated to th… https://t.co/6ixeEiQDSd— Dan Crenshaw (@Dan Crenshaw)1607705304.0
And what is the basis of this case? This: Authorities other than state legislatures unilaterally made sweeping chan… https://t.co/ANN8HiaVt1— Dan Crenshaw (@Dan Crenshaw)1607705350.0
My personal hope is that drawing additional attention to it forces states to clean up their act, and adopt far bett… https://t.co/RqgTwfF60L— Dan Crenshaw (@Dan Crenshaw)1607705443.0
Crenshaw's tweet thread came after he and 106 other Republican lawmakers who signed onto the amicus brief were branded as traitors guilty of sedition by many, including several prominent Republicans.
In his tweets, Crenshaw alleged the elections that didn't favor Trump in the states listed could not be trusted.
"...Authorities other than state legislatures unilaterally made sweeping changes to election law and therefore diminished integrity and faith in the system."
Crenshaw went on to say he hoped the suits would compel states to adopt better election practices.
"My personal hope is that drawing additional attention to it forces states to clean up their act, and adopt far better and more secure systems going forward that will garner the kind of faith in our elections our nation so desperately needs."
@DanCrenshawTX Interesting that one would be in the business of regulating other states, Dan. That doesn't sound v… https://t.co/iAHilbROhC— Marine--At Ease (@Marine--At Ease)1607705645.0
Crenshaw's stated reasoning for supporting the lawsuit makes little sense.
As MSNBC's Chris Hayes pointed out, Crenshaw's own home state of Texas made sweeping changes to its election laws this year, but that doesn't seem to have bothered Crenshaw or other members of the GOP in the least.
@DanCrenshawTX Texas was one of those states, why didn't he sue Texas? Also North Carolina, why not sue North Carolina?— Chris Hayes (@Chris Hayes)1607706591.0
All in all, virtually no one bought what Crenshaw was selling.
People from both sides of the aisle quickly showed up in his replies to point out his rank hypocrisy.
@DanCrenshawTX Your governor changed election procedures unilaterally because of COVID. The relief you’re looking f… https://t.co/SwkKDC1wAB— Tyler Dinucci (@Tyler Dinucci)1607708186.0
@DanCrenshawTX I've lost faith in anything you touch.— Joshua Trotter (@Joshua Trotter)1607712215.0
@DanCrenshawTX Maybe States should clean up their districting too? Hypocrite https://t.co/qYWwE6RtIn— Chris (@Chris)1607705982.0
@DanCrenshawTX Dan, Dan, you're a young man with a strong brand and a proven flair for leadership. The Party needs… https://t.co/RmrEsWXWC5— Tom Maguire (@Tom Maguire)1607705837.0
@DanCrenshawTX It's odd that Dan or any Republican would be complaining about election security or secure systems w… https://t.co/z7TbsxQ3kq— Beta Ray Ben (@Beta Ray Ben)1607708533.0
@DanCrenshawTX Funny how none of that is in the brief you signed your name to. I do agree your request is simple:… https://t.co/4gLZGljaRq— Jeff Watters (@Jeff Watters)1607705540.0
@DanCrenshawTX I liked you a lot more when you weren’t jumping in front of every parade. If there’s one thing that’… https://t.co/D06w5XC3qv— Scott Camp v. 2020 (@Scott Camp v. 2020)1607709275.0
@DanCrenshawTX If you or anyone could point to specific instances of voter fraud happening anywhere this would seem… https://t.co/8y2IDTSE5t— Peter Ames Carlin (@Peter Ames Carlin)1607708374.0
@DanCrenshawTX The guy with the congressional district that looks like this is concerned about fairness in the elec… https://t.co/OBU02tCC9i— Ron C (@Ron C)1607708396.0
@DanCrenshawTX A lot of people are saying that you drink babies' blood under the light of a full moon in the middle… https://t.co/ynSSRWhz0y— High Seinfeld (@High Seinfeld)1607708969.0
@DanCrenshawTX I once had alot of hope and respect for Dan Crenshaw. Now not so much.— Timothy Tressel (@Timothy Tressel)1607710847.0
In the end, the Supreme Court disagreed with Crenshaw too.
It chose Friday not to hear the case in a unanimous vote that included Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett, whom many believed Trump appointed specifically to help him steal the election.