Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Sep 17, 2020 4 tweets 1 min read Read on X
Thanks! This makes a great point. SO: Did Biden have this conversation? What do OUR transcripts show???
I'm doing a deep dive on this issue, but an initial thought: Here is DNI on these tapes. NOTE: They don't call them fake or altered but "leaked."
And on other tapes Biden's team hasn't denied he said what was on the tape, but pulled the Planned Parenthood "defense" of "heavily edited." washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
So far, then, this tapes do not appear to be "disinformation."

• • •

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

Keep Current with Margot Cleveland

Margot Cleveland 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!

PDF

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 @ProfMJCleveland

Apr 27
🔥My thoughts below were stream of conscious but after processing, I think it is a huge "discovery" I noted: In short, attorney originally referred to father of 2 year old as husband of mother but in court documents only called him "partner." 1/
2/ Under Louisiana law, if parents are NOT married at time of birth, then mother has all custodial and parental rights. Dad has to prove fatherhood (here proven by birth certificate) AND then obtain legal custodial/parental rights via court proceedings.
3/ So, if they weren't married as seems likely given court documents did not refer to him as husband, it seems very unlikely dad had any legal parental or custodial rights to 2 year old which would mean he couldn't give them to a Provisional Custodian.
Read 5 tweets
Apr 25
🚨Criminal complaint unsealed in case of Wisconsin judge helping illegal. It is just jaw-dropping that a judge would do this to help this character! Image
2/ Not merely 3 counts of domestic batter with physical pain or injury but he had already been deported once and illegal returned! Image
3/ So ICE goes to arrest him: Image
Image
Read 14 tweets
Apr 25
🚨🚨🚨District court entered injunction barring Trump Administration from taking steps to implement president's determination that unions no longer represent certain employees based on federal statute Trump invoked: 1/ Image
2/ Here is Trump's brief explaining background etc. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Read 5 tweets
Apr 25
🚨Yet another effort to interfere in Trump Administration's management of agencies filed today regarding DHS's terminations of employees. Lawsuit filed by three organizations seeks, among other things: 1/ Image
Read 7 tweets
Apr 24
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Court unseals procedure for Alien Enemies Act removals, explaining notice & process. 2 key points: First, notice is given in native language, so did ACLU mislead court by focusing on written notice being only in English? 1/ Image
Image
Image
2/ Notice provided, as Declaration states, is more than provided in expedited removal cases. THIS point was made in appeal filed in 10th Cir. earlier. Given Courts have held less process is due in other situations, where not dealing w/ terrorists, hard to say not enough here.
3/ Returning to first point: How much of ACLU's claim that notice was given only in English drove SCOTUS to interfere when there was NO decision by lower court? And did ACLU know notice provided in native language? I'd wager they did & misled court.
Read 4 tweets
Apr 24
Thanks to @Philippicae for tagging me on just filed appeal by Trump Administration in 10th Circuit challenging Colorado district court ruling in Alien Enemy Act case. 1/
2/ Entire brief is a must read for several reasons. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
3/ First, the two named plaintiffs are NOT being detained under Proclamation and have not been found to be members of tDa. As such, they cannot challenge the Proclamation or their detention under habeas on that basis. Court should have dismissed lawsuit.
Read 8 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(