I'm not sure that Congress should even have the power to impeach a President
And that the power should be limited to impeaching federal judges not on the Supreme Court
The impeachment power has allowed the House - alone - to force the Senate to sit through a nonsense trial and hold everyone hostage for three years
Unclear that it should continue to exist
In our new, hyper-partisan world, there will be immense pressure WHENEVER the House is held by a different party than the President to push for impeachment proceedings
Better for the country that those energies be directed towards winning the next election
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Today, Judge Cameron McGowan Currie dismissed the indictments of James Comey and Letitia James on the grounds that Lindsey Halligan was not properly appointed as US Attorney.
She got it wrong, quite clearly, and will almost certainly be reversed.
Here's the relevant statute. The provision authorizing AG Bondi to appoint Lindsey Halligan to a 120-day term as interim US Attorney is subsection (a). The grant of authority is broad; if "the district in which [an] office of United States Attorney is vacant," Bondi can make an appointment, with the ONLY specified exception being subsection (b). That subsection prohibits Bondi from appointing someone who has been voted down by the Senate.
Comey argued, and Judge Currie agreed (both wrongly) that subsection (d) overrides this, by saying that "if an appointment expires...the district court...may appoint a United States attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled." That's a *concurrent* authority. If it were an *exclusive* authority (meaning Bondi had no right to make consecutive appointments), it would have been mentioned as an exception to her authority in subsection (a).
Judge Currie should have been aware of all these points. This is from the introduction of DOJ's response to Comey's motion to dismiss. In a single page it explains why Halligan was clearly appointed properly, and why Comey should have lost his motion.
Yesterday, Rep. Cory Mills (@RepMillsPress) voted against censuring Ilhan Omar for suggesting Charlie Kirk was to blame for his own murder.
Rep. Mills must resign. He has a conflict of interest and cannot represent his constituents faithfully.
A thread.
Ilhan Omar is loathed by Republican voters, and her comments about Charlie were beyond the pale. This should have been straightforward.
But Rep. Mills claimed that First Amendment concerns guided his vote - and implied that Charlie himself would agree.
One doubts that this is Rep. Mills' actual rationale. For one, Nancy Mace claims that he threatened her over text last night. (Rep. Mace authored the censure resolution against Omar.) Hard to imagine he cares about Ilhan Omar *that much*. So what's really going on here?
With Kilmar Abrego Garcia back in the news, we are already seeing a mountain of bull coming from lefty immigration advocates.
Let's go back into the weeds a bit, and go through some of the falsehoods put into the press by his lawyers and agitators.
🧵
First, there were claims that Abrego Garcia had legal status in the United States. These were always false. Abrego Garcia only had withholding of removal to El Salvador. He is an illegal alien whose asylum claim was denied.
Second, there were (and are) claims that there is no evidence that Abrego Garcia was in MS-13. This is false. There is substantial evidence that he was a member, as I demonstrated in this thread.
Under @RepMariaSalazar's bill, the wife-beating illegal alien MS-13 gang banging human trafficker Kilmar Abrego Garcia could be granted citizenship by a future Democrat administration, with no further changes to American law.
A thread with citations explaining how.
Let's start with the basics of his admissibility. Abrego Garcia entered the United States in 2011 at the age of 16.
That makes him eligible for the Dreamer program under the bill. It doesn't matter that he came on his own volition.
At this point, you might note that he hasn't been continuously present in the United States because he was removed to El Salvador.
Lucky for Kilmar, there's an exception to the continuous presence requirement if you were previously removed.
Let's tell YET ANOTHER story about Kilmar Abrego-Garcia and his alleged membership in MS-13 - and his lawyer playing fast and loose with the facts.
In last night's thread, I explained how Abrego-Garcia's lawyer, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, underplayed the evidence that Abrego Garcia was a member of MS-13 contained in the Gang Field Interview Sheet (GFIS).
One of the key parts of the GFIS was the assertion of a confidential informant that Abrego-Garcia was a member of the "Westerns clique" of MS-13, including his rank and moniker. This would be pretty definitive, if true.
How did Sandoval-Moshenberg deal with this in his complaint? Well, he asserted, without equivocation, that the Westerns Clique of MS-13 "operates in Brentwood Long Island, in New York, a state that Plaintiff Abrego Garcia has never lived in."
If true, that would be pretty devastating to the credibility of the confidential informant! And indeed, both Judge Thacker's 4th Circuit opinion and Judge Xinis' district court opinion cite this specific point to discredit the evidence that Abrego-Garcia is in MS-13.
Given how fast and loose Sandoval-Moshenberg played with the GFIS, I decided to try and find the basis for his claim that the DOJ said the Westerns Clique only operates in New York.
When you search "Western Clique" on DOJ's website, all that comes up is one particular MS-13 double murder. But there's no claim by DOJ here that the Western Clique only operates in Long Island - it just says that two particular members of the Western Clique were murdered in Long Island.