Holy BEEP! By @seanmdav Yes, they ALL bought INSURANCE paid for 50% by our tax dollars to cover them for misconduct. Let that sink in! thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/tru…
2/ Also remember @JoeBiden was in on that January 5 meeting!
3/ And don't think Comey wasn't in on plot to get rid of Sessions.
4/ These disclosures also put into perspective the Weissmann Wash of all the cell phones, too, don't they?
5/ From a legal perspective, these latest disclosures put the lid on the crapola that there was a legitimate investigative purpose for interviewing @GenFlynn why DOJ said no crime. @SidneyPowell1
6/ I'm dying....When I click on @realDonaldTrump and @seanmdav is there, look who follow recommendation #1 is? And then re-read the texts exchanged....what ever computer tracking stuff Twitter uses is crazy.
7/ With SpyGate if you aren't knee-deep in it, it is hard to understand and thus easy to shrug off. But these texts are accessible to everyone b/c ALL the agents took out professional insurance liability coverage b/c of their involvement in SpyGate & fear of what was coming.
8/ Was this what @LindseyGrahamSC was foreshawdowing or was it something else?
9/ I keep thinking of new points: So get this, this is what the Obama-Biden folks did: They got an FISA order on @carterwpage who acted as U.S. intelligence source (and they knew it), using as their source, a Russian intelligence agent.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Maryland Father's attorneys sure seemed to be playing fast and loose with the facts!
2/ Garcia: "I won't plead guilty unless you deport me to Costa Rica."
DOJ: "Well, if you insist."
Garcia: "Judge you must dismiss this case because they are forcing me to plead guilty."
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Another Trump win on appeal with D.C. Circuit vacating preliminary injunction. Order isn't loading yet so details to follow. 1/
2/ Here's what the case is about:
3/ And this isn't one of the cases where things were stayed, meaning this decision now frees the Trump Administration to get back to work. The court had originally stayed a portion of the injunction, allowing Trump to fire folks but then Plaintiffs claimed Trump didn't make individualized assessment so Court of Appeals decided it wasn't going to get into that morass and just said Trump can't fire anyone (it shouldn't have and I believe one of the judge's dissented on that cop out).