MEDIA: How about pointing out that Sen. Blackburn (R-TN) tweeting *a statement from Twitter* by Lt. Col. Vindman's ex-supervisor confirms that she *does* think additional witnesses are necessary to her determination about the existing evidence, she just wants *tweets*—not Bolton? 
PS/ I tried cases for years, so I know—as do many in media—what Blackburn put out there is character evidence she considers not just relevant but admissible as part of her deliberations. But Lt. Col. Jim Hickman isn't a witness—and Blackburn will vote *against* any new witnesses.
PS2/ So you have an *active federal juror* confessing that she's listening to a self-avowed Trump supporter who is *not under oath* and *not subject to cross-examination* but is providing evidence *on Twitter* he wants jurors to hear, but she *won't* hear from Trump's former NSA.
PS3/ Sort of seems like a story U.S. media might want to cover? Both asking Blackburn why she's seeking out witness evidence on Twitter but not sworn, cross examination-eligible testimony on the Senate floor, and asking Hickman why he seeks to influence jurors in a federal trial?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
