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
🔥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.
🚨🚨🚨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entered injunction barring Trump Administration from taking steps to implement president's determination that unions no longer represent certain employees based on federal statute Trump invoked: 1/
🚨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/
🚨🚨🚨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/
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.
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/
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.