Kohl is the "First Assistant" - in DC they call it the "Principal Assistant" -- same thing. It means he's the No. 2 guy in the office. The SG's office handled the appellate court, but they don't normally appear in District Court. Normally it would be the AUSA on the case.
But the issues that Sullivan is going to want to argue about involve the decision making above the AUSA level -- why did DOJ and the US Attorney's Office decide to dismiss the case. With his background in NSD, Kohl will be much better able to deal with "materiality" issues.
And as the First Assistant Kohl will have a much stronger position from which to tell Sullivan that some of the answers to questions he might have are none of his business, which would be hard for a line AUSA to do.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with shipwreckedcrew

shipwreckedcrew 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! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @shipwreckedcrew

23 Sep
I have read it a couple times, and I know why your concerns are misplaced. The passage you are agitated about reads:
"At least at this stage of the pandemic, Jacobsen takes off the table any GENERAL challenge to EO43 based on the Fourteenths Amendment's protection of liberty."
The record substantially different than the record made in Pennsylvania. A "general" challenge would be that the Gov. lacks any authority under any circumstances to lock down the population in ways that violate personal liberty. That was NOT the basis for the Penn. decision.
In Penn the Plaintiffs created a specific and detailed factual record of what the Gov. and other state officials had done, and what their justifications were for doing so. It was not a "general" challenge--it challenged specific acts and specific justifications as not warranted.
Read 7 tweets
22 Sep
But more importantly Robert, you analysis is distorted and purposely misleading because you know better. The decision in Penn. is an outcome on the merits of a declaratory judgment action. It is not a motion for Prelim. Inj. as is the case in Chicago.
You understand the meaningful difference in the two, but you don't make that clear to the readers. In Pennyslvania the matter has been ongoing since May. The parties conducted discovery and briefed a series of orders. There was a trial by both affidavit and testimony.
With a COMPLETE FACTUAL record the District Judge was able to evaluate all the steps taken by the Penn. Gov., and his justification for doing so each step along the way. In doing so he was able to identify shortcomings and constitutional deficiencies in the procedures employed.
Read 9 tweets
22 Sep
Which theory in Chicago do you think the Panel was wrong on -- the First Amendment/Free Exercise theory, or the Selective Enforcement theory? Did the Plaintiffs argue Jacobsen?
It seems they did not:
"At this stage in the present litigation, no one is alleging that the Governor lacks the power to issue such orders as a matter of state law."
And they only challenged the order on 2 grounds.
Was the approach taken by the Plaintiffs different in Pennsylvania?
I'm guessing it was.
Thus my original claim -- bad lawyering produced the result here.
Read 4 tweets
21 Sep
Collins needs to vote "no" or "abstain" for her own survival in Maine. Her votes for Kavanaugh and against impeachment have shifted many independents in Maine against her. A third pro-Trump vote could sink her reelection.
Preservation of the GOP majority in the Senate is first and foremost on all GOP Senators minds -- they do not want to be in the minority under Chuck Schumer. Helping Collins win then is a paramount "Club" interest.
But for all but 4-5 members of the GOP Majority, getting a conservative in Ginsburg's seat is a huge victory for their base back home separate and apart for whether it helps Trump or not -- like Lindsay Graham. They could get primaried for not supporting the nominee.
Read 5 tweets
20 Sep
It is coming next week. Indictments and an interim report chronicling the actions of government officials not indicted.
This is getting a lot of traction so lets not let it linger without further exposition. My view is based on events, not inside info. Dannehy's resignation suggests Durham's probe is shifting away from investigation towards the Courtroom.
The abject panic from Dems in Congress subject to being exposed for having been behind-the-scenes participants as leakers and enablers is instructive. The idiotic letters to the IG is inexplicable unless there is a serious rumor floating around behind the scenes.
Read 5 tweets
20 Sep
The "nuclear option" to me is more accurately described as the "Reid Rule." And it's a bit misunderstood. The Senate passes "Rules" to start each session, and before Harry Reid the Senate never changed the rules mid-session. One of the rules was the "Cloture" rule.
Cloture is a process to end debate -- it is the process to close down a filibuster. It starts the clock ticking on the final hours of matter can be debated on the floor before a vote is taken. The practical effect is that it EXTENDS debate.
That is because the alternative to "cloture" was a "unanimous consent" to end debate and proceed to a vote. Dems have refused unanimous consent requests since the start of the Trump Admin., greatly slowing down the confirmation process of Exec. branch appointees and judges.
Read 9 tweets

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/month or $30/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!

Follow Us on Twitter!