Joe Profile picture
Sep 29, 2020 7 tweets 2 min read Read on X
Sullivan needs a certification that all evidence submitted is on the up and up. This is in relation to yesterday’s filing about there being alterations to Strzok’s notes. Gives DOJ a week.
Sullivan wants to know how much weight to give trump’s tweets. DOJ essentially says look at the facts, not his tweets.
The way DOJ Solicitor General Moopan says ‘Authoritative’ is chilling when he tells Sullivan, the Executive Branch made an authoritative decision to dismiss Flynn’s case. Shivers. Judge Gleeson up next.
Judge Gleeson advises if Sullivan decides to dismiss, he grant the dismissal without prejudice. Keeping the door open to come back to this. Gleeson says he has a lot to say and he hopes Sullivan let’s him say it. Says he can’t believe some of the things he’s hearing from DOJ.
Gleeson says maybe we should take a break to see if there have been any other supplemental filings given the issues raised last night. He tells Sullivan, you need to get the real reasons why the DOJ are doing this and you don’t have them yet.
Gleeson just hucklebucked all over DOJ’s argument. Says Flynn plead guilty. Says agents reminded him of things he said in a call with Kislyak didn’t try to get him to lie about it.
And screeching feedback of the phone just got me. I’m out.
END

• • •

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

Keep Current with Joe

Joe 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 @DempseyTwo

Aug 25
We are in the Both Sides Era. For what seems the past decade, we have been subjected to both sides of the news, normalizing the weird, accepting the inappropriate, and moving on from the unforgivable.
Both sides are not the same.

A wee Sunday morning coffee🧵👇🏻
We have been so conditioned to Both Sides everything that we immediately fall into one side or the other. We are sorting ourselves based on memes and shallow thinking. Reporters complaining about hotel experiences due to the DNC running late, isn’t news. That’s a yelp review.
Have you noticed trump is on both sides of every issue? Probably not, because the “press hasn’t yet learned how to report on trump.” Why is covering trump any different from what they learned in journalism school?

Why not ask him about his incongruities? Or a follow up question?
Read 22 tweets
Jul 26
Did you ever hear the phrase: “they have so much money they don’t know what to do with it.”? Not a problem, I’ve ever run into myself, but Project 2025 is just that. Billionaires want to be bankers. They want to sell off our governmental oversight to private companies they own.
Here is Project 2025. There isn’t one part of our lives this won’t touch. Think it doesn’t mean you? There is no provision to exclude from its effects those who vote for fascism so choose your candidate wisely.

static.project2025.org/2025_MandateFo…
Here is the part where they will abolish the federal reserve. It will be replaced by currency they can “create” and then lend out at their own interest rates. Image
Read 6 tweets
Jul 15
“There is no place for political violence” has been a pretty common refrain throughout the weekend. It really got me thinking. ”Political violence” must be one of those “you know it when you see it” types of things.

Let’s see…
🧵👇🏻
Political violence strikes me as a visual medium but there are so many things that occur before we see the blood that I think might be political violence. Are we just numb to it? How do we define what is political violence and what is just violence? Why is it different?
Are Texas Gov Greg Abbott’s razor balls floating in the river, considered “political violence”? Kind of. I mean, the idea is people from south of the US shouldn’t be allowed to come here and take our jobs.
Political.

To deter from this, razor balls in the river.
Violence.
Read 26 tweets
Jul 13
There’s been a lot said about Joe Biden since the debate. I, along with so many of you, watched it play out in real time as respected news transmitters read out ‘inside texts’ from knee jerk reactionaries.
After much thought, I won’t be voting for Joe Biden because he’s old.
🧵👇🏻
I’ll be voting for Joe Biden because he’s team democracy. I’m voting for ideas he represents. I’m voting for the team of people he can put together. I’m voting for my own interests and for your ability to vote for your own interests. I didn’t vote for him last time either, btw.
In 2020, I voted for a November 5th, 2024 election. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were the only options on the ballot that allowed this. I colored in Joe and Kamala’s bubble to keep the lights on long enough for us to have this election. Like many of you, I voted team democracy.
Read 21 tweets
Jul 9
I am loathe to do predictions. However, there are some things you just can’t help but see coming. Project 2025 is a blinking red alarm and we all need to be aware of the stakes of this election. Please familiarize yourself with EO11246, be discriminating voters.

A wee thread🧵👇🏻
On September 24th, 1965 President Lyndon Johnson signed Executive Order 11246. EO11246 established Equal Opportunity Employment. It includes Non-Discrimination in Government. It includes Non-Discrimination Employment by Government Contractors and Subcontractors.
Focus on Non-Discrimination Employment by Government Contractors and Subcontractors. In Sub Part B under Contractor’s Agreements, contractors agree to not discriminate against employees based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin.
Read 19 tweets
Jul 4
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Trust me…
🧵👇🏻
The above is the oath the President takes at 12 noon on January 20. Typically, it is administered by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court but there is no law that makes that a requirement. You could have your gran do it. So why is it *usually* the Chief Justice?
For this thread let’s assume the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is there as a symbol of the law. Chief Justice Roberts in a way represents the Judicial Branch of our government on the day it grants power to the person who will symbolize the Executive Branch.
Read 27 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!

:(