Texas Republicans Sue Their Own Lawyer Over Failed Election Challenges

The Republican Party of Texas is suing a lawyer that filed election challenges on their behalf after the 2022 election, claiming that they were misled by the lawyer about the amount of fraud that took place in the election. But this doesn't seem like a very winnable case, as the lawyer had to first be hired after the Republicans were the ones who were screaming about fraud and stolen elections, and they likely made the first move. Farron Cousins explains what's happening.

Listen to our videos in an audio format by subscribing to our podcast

Don't forget to like, comment, and share! And subscribe to stay connected!

Connect with Farron on Twitter

*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.

The Texas Republican Party has announced that they're filing a lawsuit against their lawyer, a woman by the name of Elizabeth Alvarez, for allegedly telling them that she had proof that the 2022 elections, certain 2022 elections, I believe in Harrisburg, Texas, uh, were stolen. And that she had the data model to prove it, except when, when the rubber met the road and they actually went to court. 'cause they believed her. Um, she didn't have the data model. So they say, according to this lawsuit, um, that she tricked them, she duped them into thinking that Harris County, it was Harris County, not Harrisburg, that's Pennsylvania. Uh, Harris County, GOP says, we were tricked into thinking that the 2022 elections last year were stolen because of this Shyte lawyer that came out and said there was a data model. And then she gets to court and says, oops, I don't have the model.

So let me ask you, let's, let's do a hypothetical thing here, right? Who's at fault? Nobody forced these Republicans in Texas to file the lawsuit. Nobody forced these Republicans in Texas to hire this lawyer. Now, if this lawyer did lie to them about this data model, because that's at the center of all of this, then yeah, she did a bad thing. But let me now ask you this. If a lawyer comes up to you and says, Hey, Faron, I got a data model that shows that you know, blah, blah, blah, you can win a lawsuit. If you file it against a Pfizer, let's just say, you know, a drug company. And this data model I've got, it's, it's in my car right now. Uh, that data model says that you've been injured. I can win this case. Will you hire me? Now I can say two, I can say multiple things here. The first one I could say is, yes, I'll hire you. The second one I could say is, no, I'm not gonna hire you. But the third and smart thing to say is, can I see the data model?

And I'm laughing because these idiot republicans in Texas are so desperate to believe that elections were stolen, that they didn't take the time to vet what she did or didn't have. So whose fault is that? That's not the lawyer's fault. If the lawyer lied to them, then yes, that's a bad thing and the lawyer should be held responsible for it by the state bar of Texas. But can she be sued because the clients didn't do their due diligence, didn't bother to look at this. So-called evidence, and even if she did produce something, it was like, oh yeah, uh, here's, here's the data model here. They should have

Been like, okay, let me see this. Um, okay, we're gonna research this and we're gonna get back to you. They didn't do that. Like at that point, it's kind of buyer beware, right? I mean, I'm not saying that I, I'm defending this lawyer by any stretch, but Republicans are so desperate to believe that they can only lose elections because of fraud that they didn't bother to look at this. So-called data model, that's on them, that's their fault. So it is what it is. Best of luck with your lawsuit, but I'm willing to bet that even if you win, you're probably gonna look like complete and total morons when the court, uh, when when the trial actually starts, because a lot of the blames gonna fall on you for just blindly going with somebody who told you things you wanted to hear and without stopping for a single second to do a little bit of critical thinking.