Okay, this is hilarious! Peter Strzok's attorney is telling Judge Sullivan that @SidneyPowell1 is violating a court order by filing these additional disclosures. 1/
2/ NOPE! The court order was to not file supplements to "pending motions," which were motions to withdraw and motion for dismissal b/c of prosecutorial misconduct. The government's motion to dismiss was not filed until later! And even Sullivan wouldn't dare say you can't file
3/ relevant evidence to that motion. But what makes it even richer?
4/ Strzok knew of the Sullivan's standing order to turn over evidence and also that if there was a debate on materiality, it had to be presented to Judge Sullivan. But did Strzok's attorney send a note to Sullivan saying "hey, you should know we didn't think he was lying" and
5/5 "we're concerned that Van Quack hasn't turned over the documents that confirm that." UNREAL!
OMgosh...post-script: Strzok's attorney calls the documents "Brady production." Ummm, nothing like admitting government violated the standing order!!!!
And I have no idea how the dates were added, but assume someone was taking notes and accidently copied wrong document, was it Jensen's team, or Powell's (if true),but really, maybe Sullivan should look at the "mistake" made by the Special Counsel's office: thefederalist.com/2020/06/01/new…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREADETTE: SCOTUS issued opinion today in case where group representing immigration judges sought to challenge in federal court rule that they had to get a supervisor's approval before speaking re immigration issues. 1/
2/ The full opinion (which is short) and Justice Thomas's concurrence are must-reads because IMNSHO they are SCOTUS first group slap to rouge judges. supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf…
🔥Pending before SCOTUS right now is petition for cert in what is one of most consequential constitutional cases related to liberty in the form of a free-market. And yet, few have taken notice of the case. In short, EPA decided who to give market share to based on "equity." 1/
@NCLAlegal 3/3 Here is the docket for those interested. It is truly appalling unelected bureaucrats are deciding whose business to kill--including taking their market share to give to so-called disadvantaged folks who never built business w/ sweat equity.
THREADETTE: SCOTUS's decision yesterday in Callais case striking down Louisiana's unconstitutional race-based districts prompted voters who brought challenge to immediately file an application asking Court to rush case back to district court so the districts could be redrawn. 1/
2/ The losers who want to continue to discriminate based on race in district mapping oppose sending case back to district court on expedited basis. And Alito ordered them to respond by 4 p.m. Fact that pro-discrimination side wants to delay case with midterms around corner makes
3/ me wonder, given @MZHemingway reporting in Alito, that Leftist justices dragged feet in Dobbs, holding up opinion by delaying dissent and THEN unnecessarily citing another SCOTUS decision that had not yet been released, whether the Leftist justices did the same here BUT
2/ Trump Admin. prior comments indicated they would secure Strait of Hormuz & possibly take over Kharg Island to get oil moving. Last night, Trump indicated we will lead efforts to open Strait but those impacted need to join fight. Now, this may be misdirection to attack Kharg,
3/ Or Trump decided, we're not going to risk Americans' lives to do either if those in need of that oil won't step up. But we will continue the much safer bombing which will eventually (which he suggested may be about 3 weeks), lead to Strait opening b/c Iran is on last legs
4/ of weapons & leaders. Trump may well have thought Iran would be Venezuela & he'd be done within days or a few weeks, but he's making clear we will continue bombing until morale improves. He's betting on short-term pain being greatly overset by Iran's full destruction.