Profile picture
Neal Katyal
@neal_katyal
, 3 tweets, 2 min read Read on Twitter
In a new letter,DOJ is trying to dictate what Mueller can talk about, claiming anything not in public report is privileged. But as I just wrote in @nytimes, Barr himself has said--since Mueller turned in report--Mueller could say if Trump committed crimes. nytimes.com/2019/07/22/opi…
The letter isn't even signed by a high ranking DOJ official, and it certainly doesn't take back what Barr said Mueller was able to do. DOJ now appears scared and resorting to their old playbook. Given their prior gross distortions of what Mueller found, hard to give credence here
The whole tone of letter is bizarrely adversarial, not a way to treat a former FBI Director. For example, the line re DOJ doesn't generally let prosecutors "such as you" from testifying ridic-Mueller not ordinary prosecutor. For starters, he can't indict a Pres, only Cong can act
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 Neal Katyal
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!

More from @neal_katyal see all

Profile picture
Neal Katyal
@neal_katyal
Another big question: Rep. Lasko (republican) just asked about this:
Lieu: "The reason you did not indict Donald Trump... is because of the OLC decision. Is that correct?"
Mueller: "That is correct."
Lasko says this contradicts what Mueller earlier said 1/
, that Mueller said on May 29 that he wasn't saying we would have indicted if there was no OLC opinion.
Mueller did not take back what he said to Lieu. If he doesn't take it back, will be big news: despite all his guardrails, Mueller saying he would have indicted but-for OLC op
Would mean the Democrats talking point, that if anyone else but Donald Trump acted this way they'd be in jail, is right.
Read 6 tweets
Profile picture
Neal Katyal
@neal_katyal
Excellent questioning (finally) by @tedlieu. He took the individual items on p97 of the Report and showed how it all lays out a full and complete crime. This may sound complicated, with 3 elements and the like, but everyone needs to understand what just happened.
Mueller just ended by saying he didn't necessarily subscribe to what Lieu "was saying." But there is no explanation at all of how or where Lieu's analysis was questionable. And indeed the Report lays out the case, in its own words.
The basic thing page 97 outlines is obstruction of justice b/c Trump tried to get Sessions to unrecuse&end Mueller investigation of Trump. There are 3 elements:obstructive act, criminal intent+ nexus to an official proceeding. @tedlieu effectively got Mueller to say each of 3 met
Read 4 tweets
Profile picture
Neal Katyal
@neal_katyal
So psyched for @hadestown to begin. Saw it off broadway 4 years ago and finally made it here after a long work slog
Update: Omg that was awesome. Near perfect. Only since one musical better in my life and that was written by living Shakespeare. Run run run to see it if you can.
Seen not since
Read 3 tweets

Related threads

Profile picture
Gabriel Malor
@gabrielmalor
DOJ has filed a strong rebuttal of the conspiracy theory advanced by plaintiff organizastions and the ACLU and spread by the NYTimes that the census citizenship question was inspired by a secret 2015 study. assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6163…
The lack of any link between the 2015 study and Sec. Ross is damning, but I think the worse thing is that plaintiffs had all this stuff in discovery and only now, with a SCOTUS decision days away, leaping to claim that remand is necessary.
It's bad-faith, dirty lawyering and these plaintiffs should not be rewarded for it.
Read 8 tweets
Profile picture
Katie Benner
@ktbenner
The critique of #Mueller's overall approach to the Special Counsel investigation that has emerged today is that he did not -- at the outset -- inform the public that he would never go down the road of determining whether or not Trump obstructed justice. 1/
Doing so would have set the public's expectations accordingly. We'd have spent the last two years waiting to see whether he prosecuted Russian govt actors for interfering in the election; and he found Trump campaign helped Russia in those efforts. 2/
But on obstruction we would have known that he was merely collecting and sifting through evidence; and that -- per DOJ policy -- it would've been up to "a process other than the criminal justice system" to weigh that evidence and decide whether to act against the president 3/
Read 5 tweets
Profile picture
Ryan J. Reilly
@ryanjreilly
NEW: DOJ confirms Barr is bailing on House Judiciary Committee tomorrow.

"Chairman Nadler’s insistence on having staff question the Attorney General, a Senate-confirmed Cabinet member, is inappropriate.”
Story: huffpost.com/entry/barr-dro…
Nadler on Barr: "Given his lack of candor in describing the work of the Special Counsel, our Members were right to insist that staff counsel be permitted to question the Attorney General.” huffpost.com/entry/barr-dro…
Read 7 tweets
Profile picture
The Epoch Times
@EpochTimes
News Analysis 🔎 | Following AG William Barr’s refusal to recuse himself from the #SpecialCounsel probe, a series of revealing and interconnected events rapidly unfolded. (Thread 👇) theepochtimes.com/a-common-threa…
Barr-Huber Meeting
On March 7, Barr had a notable meeting with Attorney John Huber of #Utah, who had been appointed as vice chair of the AG’s Advisory Committee by former AG @JeffSessions to investigate “all the allegations that the House Judiciary Committee members sent to us.”
Sessions wrote:
“Mr. Huber is conducting his work… in cooperation with the Inspector General. The additional matters raised… fall within the scope of his existing mandate, and I am confident that Mr. Huber’s review will include a full, complete, and objective evaluation…”
Read 43 tweets
Profile picture
Lola Netty
@TXTrumpette89
What happened to the #Mueller hype?
What happened to the Mueller will take down #POTUS threats [@JohnBrennan]?
Was MUELLER the 'insurance' policy aka #BLOCKADE designed to limit/restrict POTUS' ability to enforce the law?
[#TRAITORS]
"complexities, opaqueness & length of counterintel investigations, I’d be surprised if #Mueller was able to uncover breadth of this #conspiracy. More digging will have to be done. But there’ll be crimes. & we better get to see them://t.co/seYfCs0d6q
"A concise #Mueller report would mark the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end, argues @neal_katyal"

#ratsrunning #wearethenewsnoKlHaaEz80A
Read 13 tweets
Profile picture
Tim Hogan
@TimInHonolulu
18. Finally got my #DOJ #FOIA request response for the folks who maintain the AG's records. In sum, "IraqGate? Willian Barr? Never them heard of 'em." 😎 @maddow @Lawrence @PhilipRucker @CIA
19. Here's link to all the William Safire @nytimes rage OpEds. They are highlighted for #williambarr references and the last one has my brother. There's a special guest in one. Sorry, no spoilers. 😎
20. My @TheJusticeDept FOIA response said they didn't have a copy of the report. Wished me luck. Here are the page references to Barr from the contemporaneous book about it.
Read 7 tweets

Trending hashtags

#Pelosi #Antifa #AntiLynching #TweetTheMuellerReport #MuellerProbe #NSA #ThePlan #DoItPOTUS #DSMeadia #DeepState #Mueller #Panic #JulianAssange #DIA #ReductionInForce #ReleaseTheText #Strzok #outrage #Patriot #POTUS #Barr #Rosenstein #JohnMcCain #Breads #Assange
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!