Can Schmitt ever make up his mind and stick to one talking point? Back in December, Schmitt told the Anton Newspapers that "The Democratic majority on the legislature is fractured. There will be an election on Jan. 3 for presiding officer. Someone needs to get 10 votes. I have nine. Roger Corbin has three or four. Judy Jacobs has five or six. Nobody has 10. I don't want to be presiding officer of a legislature that is a Democratic majority. To break the logjam, several members of my delegation have agreed to support Roger Corbin as presiding officer."
What was that again? "Someone needs to get 10 votes."
I'm sorry, can you repeat that Peter? "Someone needs to get 10 votes."
That's what I thought I heard him say.
Why is this important?
Because the lawsuit brought by the Democrats says that since no one got 10 votes, Schmitt is not the Presiding Officer.
Schmitts lawyer is saying that he doesn't need 10 votes. Yet Schmitt himself said the exact opposite a month ago.
Schmitt's lawyer is actually fighting what Schmitt himself stated as fact.