Profile picture
, 3 tweets, 2 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
Almost exactly a year ago, I said Barr likely tapped John Durham to lead the investigation into the investigators prior to March 18, 2019. CNN today confirms Barr’s first in person meeting with Durham was March 25, 2019 cnn.com/2020/05/20/pol…
Rod Rosenstein was cut out of the meetings with Durham. A great sign, given his disastrous scope memos and "oversight" of Mueller
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Undercover Huber

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread 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 @JohnWHuber see all

Profile picture
Undercover Huber
@JohnWHuber
There are zero things wrong with this Dec 29 call between Kislyak and @GenFlynn. And the tone of the conversation is clearly about expulsions, not the wider economic and political sanctions. That @Comey and the Obama admin wanted to Logan Act this is a disgrace Image
Word for word versions shows only Kislyak used the word “sanctions” or “sanctioned” - very briefly, Flynn only responded with “yeah yeah” a couple of times. No substantive discussion. Entire exchange less than approx. 4 minutes. ImageImageImage
Also only Kislyak appears to be actually aware the sanctions (political and economic, I.e. distinct from the expulsions) had been *announced*. Flynn seems to be anticipating them being announced. Which makes sense, given he was on holiday in the Dominican Republic
Read 3 tweets
Profile picture
Undercover Huber
@JohnWHuber
"The applicable precedents are clear and unambiguous: There is simply no basis upon which this Court can review and deny the Government’s motion to dismiss, to which the defense has consented."

THREAD on excellent @McAdooGordon amicus brief filed in @GenFlynn case
Note this amicus brief is signed by ~30 "Federal Practitioners" - a bipartisan group of attorneys with extensive experience in the federal court system, including Prosecutors, government attorney's, FBI agents, state Attorneys General, law clerks, Judges & even Congressmen
"Where a court denies a consented motion to dismiss under Rule 48, it is overriding the Executive’s exercise of discretion and thereby is usurping the Executive’s authority"
Read 20 tweets
Profile picture
Undercover Huber
@JohnWHuber
SCO prosecutors charged @GeorgePapa19 with a 20yr felony, even though they knew they couldn't prove that & misled the court & media

On top of that malfeasance, SCO lawyer Kevin Clinemith later effectively admitted to that *exact same felony* before GP was even charged

THREAD
Note: This is a very long thread for memorial day weekend, so grab a beer or coffee and find somewhere comfortable, we’re going to be here a while. Okay, lets roll…
Everyone probably remembers that @GeorgePapa19 (GP) was charged in July 2017 by the Special Counsel's Office (SCO) with false statements (a 18 USC §1001 felony), made during his Jan 27, 2017 interview with the FBI. And GP later pled guilty…
Read 47 tweets

Embed code for your website

×
Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two 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!