Tweet

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @RosenzweigP

Paul Rosenzweig

@RosenzweigP

27 Oct

There are many things totally wrong with Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence in the Wisconsin case yesterday, but this one piece takes the cake. Kavanaugh writes: "those States also want to be able to definitively announce the results of the election on election night, /1

or as soon as possible thereafter." Let's be clear -- there are ZERO states that definitively announce the results of the election on election night. ZERO. The results announced on election night are all partial returns since EVERY state, tallies absentee ballots and /2

provisional ballots in the days after an election. When an election winner is "announced" on election night it is a projection announced (ironically enough) by the media based on partial returns, percentage reporting, and exit polling. It is NEVER the official result /3

Read 5 tweets

Paul Rosenzweig

@RosenzweigP

12 Oct

If your focus is on "court packing" and not on refusing to promise a peaceful transfer of power /1

And not on tax fraud and money laundering campaign contributions /2

And not on raking in millions in personal profit /3

Read 6 tweets

Paul Rosenzweig

@RosenzweigP

18 Sep

Four years ago, when the US gave up its contractual control of the DNS system, I thought it was unwise. My reasoning was simple -- I thought that the US govt had stood as a bulwark against authoritarian influence on the network since it was created and that continued US /1

influence as a protector of network freedom would be a net benefit to the world. Critical to that assessment was my belief that no USG would ever support an effort to severely restrain freedom of expression on the network. There were exceptions to this general rule /2

of course, like the dot xxx fiasco, but as a general proposition I thought it was well-supported.

I was wrong. Today the USG actually moved to control the content that US citizens can put on their phones, purporting to ban WeChat and TikTok. Besides being utterly /3

Read 6 tweets

Paul Rosenzweig

@RosenzweigP

6 Sep

@RealDonaldTrump

How bad a president is @RealDonaldTrump? Let me count the ways:
1.#DerangedDonald: Thinks windmills cause cancer
2.Thinks nuclear bombs stop hurricanes
3.Still thinks the hurricane is going to Alabama
4.Thinks UV light and bleach stop C29
5.Thinks QAnon followers are OK

6.Person, Woman, Man, Camera, TV
7.#TrumpsNotWell: Can’t walk down a ramp
8.Needs two hands to drink water
9.Slurs his words
10.Won’t release his medical records

11. #PutinsPuppet: Took Putin’s word in Helskinki over the ICs
12.Shared Israelis secrets with Russia
13.Is taking troops out of Germany
14.Won’t support democracy in Belarus
15.50+ days an no response to Russian bounties on US soldiers

Read 21 tweets

Paul Rosenzweig

@RosenzweigP

20 Jun

Barr lied. It is that simple. Yesterday he said that Berman had resigned. That was not true.

This is not, of course, the first time that Barr has proven to be a stone cold liar. He lied about the contents of the Mueller report. /1

But the question is why? And the answer lies at the intersection of the effort to fire Berman (now, apparently, approved by the President -- though maybe Barr is lying about that too) and the firing of Jessie Liu. /2

By firing Liu, Barr and his henchmen took control of the DC US Atty's Office. With that control they intervened politically in the sentencing of Roger Stone, and now in an effort to dismiss the case against Flynn. This is how an authoritarian works to subvert justice. /3

Read 9 tweets

Paul Rosenzweig

@RosenzweigP

10 Apr

Congress cannot, directly, prohibit the President from firing Inspectors General -- though it could at some point amend the IG Act to allow the IGs to contest their dismissal as pretextual in court. But that would take a new law that won't pass anytime soon. So what to do now?/1

In the forthcoming Covid-19 bill, Congress could consider any number of ways to condition aid on the President's actions. Here's one draft possibility: "Provided, however, that no funds authorized or appropriated under this Act may be obligated or disbursed on any day /2

on or after the date on which the President exercises his authority under [cite to IG Act] in dismissing any Inspector General." I can think of other formulations, but that is a start.

One further point: To drive this home, Congress would need to explicitly declare /3

Read 6 tweets

Share this page!

Paul Rosenzweig

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @RosenzweigP

Paul Rosenzweig

Paul Rosenzweig

Paul Rosenzweig

Paul Rosenzweig

Paul Rosenzweig

Paul Rosenzweig

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?