Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Nov 7, 2020 21 tweets 7 min read Read on X
This thread explains how I got to the "Trump Accountability Project" enemies list since it's not publicly accessible anymore. /1
I saw this tweet from AOC: Image
And I noticed this reply tweet: Image
So I clicked on @trumpaccproject & got this: Image
So I clicked on:

"trumpaccountability.net"
And that took me to: Image
So, I clicked on "See the List" & at that time, it took you here: Image
Now it takes you here: Image
And, once I saw what it was, I took all the screen shots, and then I backed up to the original tweet 👇to see who this guy was. Image
And this is who he is: Image
And then I searched for "Trump Accountability Project" and similar terms & came up with these: ImageImage
Which takes you to these two "winners." ImageImage
Because they are doing this all out in the open, because they are totalitarian thugs.
But after I started tweeting about it, they took off two of the tabs from their list: the "Appointees" tab and the "Donors" tab, which had the list of judges and campaign donors. See 👇 ImageImage
And, eventually they made the whole list private, although you can still access it here:
web.archive.org/web/2020110621…
They left their website up, but they made some significant changes to it. Here: (left is original) ImageImage
And here: (left is original). Evidently they figured out, at a minimum, that putting judges and donors on an enemies list was probably a bad idea. 🙄 ImageImage
And like the cowards that these people always are, they have now made their accounts private. Image
Image
Oh, and they have this site up, where they still mention the judiciary, and call their enemies list a "registry." 🙄 Image
And here's the start of my thread with the full list in tweet thread form. At the end there are links to other ways to see it also.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸

Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 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 @McAdooGordon

Apr 21
The test for whether spoken words are free speech or not is called the Brandenburg test from a SCOTUS case in 1969. It is also called the "imminent lawless action" test. ONLY if the speech rises to that level does it fall outside of the protection of the First Amendment.
In essence the speech must be the kind that does or inexorably is known to lead to "imminent disorder." (This standard is from another SCOTUS case in 1973, Hess.)

This is a very high bar & effectively renders almost all speech that doesn't actually result in violence, protected.
The "speech" in Brandenburg took place at a KKK rally, disparaged Blacks & Jews, suggested "revengance" should be had against the Congress for "suppressing" whites, & explained there would be a "march on Congress" on July 4th of 400,000, followed by marches in FL & MS.
Read 7 tweets
Apr 16
Listening to Fischer argument now. Govt arguing 2nd.

Sounds to me like the 3 liberal justices are in favor of the govt‘s position.

So far, I have 3 of the conservatives in favor of Fischer - Chief Roberts, Alito & Thomas.

Not sure yet on Barrett, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh.
Robert’s really arguing with the SG - that doesn’t usually happen.
Gorsuch is definitely for Fischer. He’s scorching the SG.
Read 13 tweets
Apr 13
Understand reality:

The US govt needs to & is going to spy on foreigners overseas & also here, in our security defense.

FISA or no FISA, that will happen.

The only questions are who “gate keeps” it & how & what the standards are & whether the standards differ inside the US.
There is no question in my mind, at all, that the federal govt has unlimited power to spy on foreigners overseas for our national security intelligence purposes.

None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

Domestic spying- of foreigners here & of US persons here & abroad- present different issues.
And there is an age old problem of whether/if/when/how information obtained from intelligence can be used in the criminal process.

These issues must be debated vigorously & our rights as US persons jealousy guarded.
Read 5 tweets
Mar 18
Free speech.

In my view the case before the SCOTUS this morning on free speech at base is not that complicated:

The govt, just like any other actor in our society, can speak.

But unlike some other actors, in speaking, the govt cannot tell others what to say or not say.
The govt can add its voice to the free exchange of ideas in the open marketplace of discussion . And it can say that its information or viewpoint is the “official” govt version.

It CANNOT, however, insist that alternative info or views be suppressed, directly or indirectly.
It has to compete openly for respect and primacy and supremacy for its views in the marketplace of ideas, just like every other speaker.

Anything else is a violation of the citizens’ First Amendment rights.
Read 6 tweets
Mar 18
Free speech.

The Supreme Court this morning is going to hear argument in the case about how the govt communicates to social media companies.

The case is Murthy v Missouri, case No. 23-411. (It was previously named Missouri v Biden.)
I will be listening to it and I may live tweet it.

I will definitely summarize the argument for you guys afterwards.
So you know: The reason the case name changed is that technically you don’t sue the POTUS for actions of the govt. You sue the agency official carrying out the govt policy or sometimes the agency or the U.S. itself, it depends on the claim. POTUS, as we know, is immune from suit.
Read 5 tweets
Mar 2
To explain this 👇🏻 a bit.

First, here is the memo if you want to read it:

drive.google.com/file/d/1ztChjH…
I write this memo two years ago and sent it to lawyers who are on the list serve for the defense counsel on the J6 cases to circulate to anyone defending those cases. I also sent it to the public defender.

I wanted all the defense lawyers to have access to the argument.
As most of you know, the DOJ jacked up the cases on J6 defendants by charging them with obstruction of justice under 18 USC 1512. I think that is a misuse of the statute, & as you know the SCOTUS is set to hear argument on that point in April.
Read 13 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!

:(