What happens if Russia doesn't know what would trigger US to use this power?
"American strategy has shifted more toward offense…with the placement of potentially crippling malware inside the Russian system at a depth and with an aggressiveness that had never been tried before."
Caveat: Words "attack" (in headline), "shifted more toward offense," "offensive" are unfortunate. Placement of malware to deter Russian actions is an "attack," and not defensive operation? nytimes.com/2019/06/15/us/…
.@SangerNYT@nicoleperlroth raise key point: if US strategy "enshrines power grids as a legitimate target."
Should at least consider a limit: in int'l practice, sometimes it's legal/legitimate to take "action X" only in response to other state having taken X action against you.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
3/ "Mr. Miller chairs a bimonthly meeting — called a 'wins' meeting — at which various government agencies report on recent successes, with the Pentagon’s death toll from boat strikes regularly highlighted as one of the biggest."
Hegseth's Defense Department's flat denial from March 31 (now appears to be provably false)⤵️
3/ BBC also fact checked the DoD's denial:
Six experts "all commented independently ... citing the missile's visual features, the way it exploded, its trajectory and the number of strikes in the area."
After outrageous letter by Blanche and Bondi, Judge Novak (Trump appointee) wrote:
“The Court finds it inconceivable that the Department of Justice, which holds a duty to faithfully execute the laws of the United States — even those with which it may have disagreement — would repeatedly ignore court orders, while simultaneously prosecuting citizens for breaking the law."
3/ After Blanche's chief of staff violated a court order in Mangioni case, federal judge wrote:
“The Government is also directed to advise the Deputy Attorney General, for dissemination within the Department as appropriate, that future violations may result in sanctions, which could include personal financial penalties, contempt of court findings, or relief specific to the prosecution.”
DOJ admits repeatedly made "material mistaken" representations to judge. ICE never had authority (under 2025 Guidance) to conduct arrests at immigration courthouses!
"This error, however, is not caused by a lack of diligence and care by the undersigned attorneys. The undersigned were specifically informed by ICE that the 2025 ICE Guidance applied to immigration courthouse arrests."
"... agency attorney error ..."
3/ You can be assured that we'll add this to 5th edition of Presumption of Regularity study.
Currently tracks 90+ cases in which either court determined the Trump administration submitted false information or the administration admitted it.