Jed always has a thoughtful analysis. But sometimes, like many profs, he doesn’t seem to understand litigation or negotiation strategy.

Sometimes getting a court to tell you “no” is tactic for the court to tell you “no, BUT . . . “ Then you do the “but.” With judicial backing.
A good part of what’s happening now is House Dems structuring contempt/subpoena litigation for two tasks:

- Rulings “yes, you can get x, y, z w/o impeachment.”

- Rulings “no, unless you impeach you can’t get a, b, c.”

The second group of rulings is just as important.
It will amount to, and be played as, a judicial imperative to impeach, so that full oversight can occur. That’s 2 branches vs. one, in effect.
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Shockratees 🇺🇸🏳️‍🌈🐄
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!