So, seems only fair to ask what if any conversations @LindseyGrahamSC had with the South Carolina Secretary of State pertaining to his own race, no?
The Arizona SOS is a Democrat. Who did Graham conspire with?
So Graham just picked and chose among Republican officials with authority over election administration in three states and encouraged them to throw out enough votes for Trump to steal the election?

• • •

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

Keep Current with Brian Beutler

Brian Beutler 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!


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 @brianbeutler

17 Nov
Idk, here’s another pretty key quote, sourced to five people: “They said he has specifically told advisers that he is wary of federal tax investigations of Trump.”
You should also not want the incoming president to let it be known through informal channels that he wants his DOJ to turn a blind eye. Tweeting like a maniac isn’t the only mode available to a president.
I share this interpretation, both of what the NBC article means and what Biden’s focus should be. Would only add that a public-facing audit would be more “distracting” than DOJ investigations, and if Biden’s truly wary of the latter, he’ll be wary of the former. A troubling sign.
Read 7 tweets
17 Nov
To be a bit less coy, it’s been common in recent years for progressive ballot initiatives associated with Dem candidates to pass in states that simultaneously crush those Democrats. I think it cuts against the idea that some magic policy formula will save the party from itself.
Part of the reason is that candidates associated with a national party can’t replicate the depersonalized nature of a ballot initiative simply by campaigning on the policy.

Part of it is that the Republicans in those races just lie and say they also support Popular Policy X.
Maybe if Dems could impose a gag rule on electeds, aides, wonks, activists prohibiting them from advocating anything other than these initiatives, it’d work out great. But 1) that’s impossible and 2) it‘d alienate millions whose needs can’t be addressed by those policies alone.
Read 5 tweets
17 Nov
Republicans are so shameless everyone just accepts they won’t do anything about this even if there’s a big outcry, and it’s convinced a lot of Dems that doing things like “calling on corrupt leaders to resign” is pointless and lame. But letting those muscles atrophy is a problem.
That means the official Dem response to a powerful GOP chairman asking a state election official to light votes on fire will max out at scowls of disappointment, while his counterpart on the committee is this person.
When Trump (intentionally or through contemptible negligence) exposed his Dem opponent to COVID, GOP electeds skated, because the Democratic mind leapt ahead to the (probably correct) assumption that the GOP would protect Trump, so what was the point of demanding accountability?
Read 4 tweets
12 Nov
Still believe a terse letter to Emily Murphy of GSA from the House promising a subpoena, and (failing immediate compliance) a criminal contempt referral to the incoming DOJ, would end this sabotage. Leadership, as usual, is nowhere on this, but busy attacking its own members.
The one time in all of history when a Sternly Worded Letter might actually accomplish something, and they can’t even muster it.
Here‘s James Lankford, extremely conservative Republican senator, promising to do more with his power to help Biden access at least some of the transition materials he’s entitled to than House Democrats have bothered to try. It’s inexcusable.
Read 4 tweets
10 Nov
Send him a friendly subpoena tomorrow.
House Dems abdicated solemn oversight obligations for two years because, we were told, that’s what was necessary to defend the majority. They lost several seats clinging to this belief. On what grounds can they justify continued passivity in the face of these ultimate abuses?
Read 4 tweets
9 Nov
Like, we’ll be lucky if it’s just a few corrupt pardons and/or firings.
More extremely on-the-level activity here.
Read 6 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

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!