why the heck didn't Mueller investigate the "elephant that’s not just in the room but sitting uncomfortably in their laps. Christopher Steele’s dossier is clearly a Russian intelligence operation." (Or conclude it wasn't!) 2/ thefederalist.com/2019/05/06/maj…
3/3 AND we KNOW a lot more than what is mentioned in the Hill article about what Barr is looking into: thefederalist.com/2019/05/17/kno…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🚨By happenstance I came across new lawsuit yesterday while trying to find case filed in federal court in Boston seeking to toss contempt of INS agent who arrested someone in middle of trial. (Anyone have that petition/complaint?). Anyway, what I found was habeas by alien. 1/
2/ What is important about this case is it reveals a new strategy by aliens to avoid Trump's enforcement of immigration law. Alien being held filed a petition for habeas in Court and Court enters order prohibiting alien's transfer until he figures out if he has jurisdiction.
3/ Thing is you can't file habeas until you have exhausted your immigration procedures (Alien Enemies Act has no procedures so you can). So basically, this is causing delay and costing resources to handle basic removal proceedings.
🚨Hearing on Show Cause ended. Below was play-by-play. My thoughts follow. Judge is going to find government in contempt and continue this farce. In this hearing Judge came off as the most biased and unkeeled he has yet. Two examples: 1/
2/ While the hearing was on whether Trump Administration violates his orders, Judge wanted to frame rushing to avoid order being entered as problem for him. It's not: Judge can't hold someone in contempt b/c they went to great lengths to avoid being in contempt by rushing things.
3/ Relatedly Judge wanted to stress that point by saying "rush" caused a mistake of someone on plane who shouldn't have been. BUT as DOJ pointed out, he was on third plane where removals were under other removal procedures & it had nothing to do with Alien Enemies Act.
🚨"Show Cause" hearing in Alien Enemies Act case on question of whether Trump Administration violated Court's order set to start in 15 minutes. I'll try to cover live here. 1/
2/ Here's your pre-read which explains Trump Administration's arguments and my predictions.
3/ Judge: Looking further into parties compliance with TROs. Judge asks DOJ to start.
Given public attention wants to reiterate "effect" of TRO, you agree did not release any tDa member to be released or from apprehending or deporting per regular measure and some even deported on that basis.
My TRO only said couldn't deport by Proclamation.
If anyone in administration makes statements they wouldn't be true.
Me: Judge isn't doing himself any favors.
Judge: Claims government is bad faith and didn't comply.
🚨Yesterday Trump Administration filed reply in SCOTUS in Alien Enemies Act case. This paragraph sums up point I've been stressing: Judge Boasberg so wanted to stop removal that he bypassed question of whether he had jurisdiction. 1/
2/ There are many difficult legal questions with no precedent re the Alien Enemies Act, but you can't ignore jurisdiction because you really, really, really want to stop something you believe is bad...either at start of case or mid-flight!
3/ Congress also has political question to answer: Does it want to amend the Alien Enemies Act to require process beyond habeas? To limit President's authority? To define undefined terms?
In looking for another case, I came across two cases docketed today re immigration issues where filings aren't available: This one seeks release from INS Detection and this seeks an adjudication on a visa issue. 1/
2/ I'm interested in these cases because (other than the Alien Enemies Act) there is a very clear procedure for how to challenge immigration issues and it isn't in the district court. Rather, aliens must proceed through the administrative process, ALJ (Administrative Law Judge)
3/ Then to appeal before the BIA (Board of Immigration Appeal) and after that they can challenge to a federal circuit court. They cannot bring habeas or other challenges in a district court: Congress purposefully removed jurisdiction from district court to avoid flooding court
THREADETTE: THIS. AND we still don't know 2 key points: WHAT prompted Aspen Institute to run "table top exercise" to "prebunk" story amazingly similar to reality. AND why was Baltimore FBI agent running keyword searches to flag disinformation for Twitter? /1
2/ It wasn't merely FBI feeding "hack and leak" warnings to social media. THAT IS HUGE STORY & we need to know if folks doing that knew of Hunter Biden laptop OR were fed idea of hack and leak by someone who did. BUT also what/who prompted Aspen Institute's focus on Hunter.
3/ Here's my reporting on that aspect that I've yet to see anyone else pick up on. ALSO note that many "disinfo" experts say prebunking as MOST effective counter to folks believing disinformation, or here truth. thefederalist.com/2023/02/09/twi…