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
😡😡😡So after @howappealing highlighted this from Times yesterday, I had a friend share because I figured he wouldn't promote garage and I wanted to see if analysis was any better. But OMgosh! #$@%! 1/ nytimes.com/2024/05/20/opi…
2/ Since they are continuing to peddle garbage, now setting it on fire, here's a serious analysis of the issue. thefederalist.com/2024/05/20/i-r…
3/3 And let me end with this. Alito is not "blaming his wife." He is doing EXACTLY what the Code of Conduct requires: "Disassociating" himself from the flag.
🚨Working on a piece for Monday @FDRLST on the fake flag scandal re Alito. Here's your shorter version: There is no scandal! I served as career law clerk for federal appellate judge for ~25 years, 6 of which I assisted with Codes of Conduct inquiries. While those rules don't 1/
2/apply to Supreme Court justices, the justices apply the same principles. The difference being there is much more detail for lower courts, including that judges are barred from displaying political signs. BUT the rules also make clear that doesn't apply to spouses.
3/ In fact, the Codes of Conduct committee made that point clear through advise. Yes, Judge should discourage, but NO Judge is not "boss" of his spouse and no ethical violation is spouse decides to post a political sign.
🔥🔥🔥THREAD: Today a federal court in Texas granted @realDailyWire @FDRLST & @KenPaxtonTX expedited discovery in their lawsuit against the State Department & GEC, with youthful powerhouse public interest law firm @NCLAlegal representing Media Plaintiffs. 1/
2/ Press release on today's rulings is here...rulings as in plural because Court denied State Department's Motion to Dismiss the First Amendment and ultra vires claims and also Motion to Transfer. nclalegal.org/2024/05/ncla-d…