Share this page!

Brad Heath Profile picture
Twitter logo
12 Dec, 4 tweets, 2 min read
"Spider," the secret military-intelligence witness behind Sidney Powell's fantastical election-fraud lawsuits never served in military intelligence, but rather was enrolled in a training program where he "kept washing out of courses," the Army says.
Spider didn't read his election-fraud declaration before he signed it! I mean, these lawsuits have been a catastrophic heap of exceptionally bad witnesses, but this is really spectacular.
For the record, the substance of Spider's testimony also is utter garbage. medium.com/@micallst/misu…
Oops.
washingtonpost.com/investigations…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Brad Heath

Brad Heath 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 @bradheath

Brad Heath Profile picture
13 Dec
Sidney Powell - the lawyer behind the fantastical Kraken election lawsuits - has indicated that she will ask the Supreme Court whether it really meant that all of this election-conspiracy stuff should stay off of its lawn.
(It did. The court very clearly indicated that this stuff is not welcome on its lawn.)
Always cool to try to sell the Supreme Court on your anonymous witness even though he was identified in the press yesterday and some of the stuff you're saying about his credentials is demonstrably false and you knew it before you filed this.
Read 4 tweets
Brad Heath Profile picture
12 Dec
President Trump has now lost his federal lawsuit in Wis. seeking to overturn the election there. A judge appointed by Trump ruled that he "has not proved" that the election was carried out in a way that violated his rights or state law.
Judge: "This is an extraordinary case. A sitting president who did not prevail in his bid for reelection has asked for federal court help in setting aside the popular vote. ... This Court has allowed the plaintiff to make his case and he has lost on the merits."
Trump actually got farther in this lawsuit than he did in his others. The judge ruled that he had standing to sue under the Electors Clause, isn't barred by the 11th Am., isn't barred by abstention, isn't moot.

Instead, his case just failed on the merits.
Read 4 tweets
Brad Heath Profile picture
11 Dec
Here's the Supreme Court order rejecting Texas' attempt to throw out the results of the presidential election in four other states. The court declines to hear it; the only dispute is a technical one over the manner by which it is killed.

It's over.

supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
The court's decision - that Texas lacks standing to bring this case - means it could not and did not reach the other issues. But these claims have all been rejected for many, many, many other reasons by other state and federal courts. Many.
Justices Alito and Thomas indicated that the court was (in their very consistent view) required to hear the case but that they too "would not grant other relief" - meaning they too wouldn't sign on to Texas' request for an injunction throwing out the election.
Read 9 tweets
Brad Heath Profile picture
11 Dec
Texas has filed its reply brief in its Supreme Court lawsuit seeking to overturn the results of the presidential election in four other states.

supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/2…
Texas says it "does not seek to disenfranchise the majority of Defendant States' voters." Rather it argues nobody knows who won those states.
Texas thinks "a few urban centers" manufactured votes to steal the election from President Trump.
Read 9 tweets
Brad Heath Profile picture
10 Dec
Judge Ludwig says President Trump's request to overturn the election he lost in Wisconsin is "incredibly unique."
Ludwig is asking sharp questions. He suggests that the constitutional "manner" Wis. chose for selecting its presidential electors is having a popular election. The state did that; the features Trump doesn't like aren't "a significant departure from the legislative scheme."
Ludwig says the 7th Cir. doctrine of laches pretty clearly favors Wisconsin and says Trump's reasons for waiting to sue until after the election to challenge procedures he didn't like simply weren't credible.
Read 4 tweets
Brad Heath Profile picture
10 Dec
Michigan has filed its response to Texas' lawsuit. "The challenge here is an unprecedented one, without factual foundation or a valid legal basis."
Michigan's document title:
Link: supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/2…
Read 4 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!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @bradheath has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @bradheath!

Read all threads by @bradheath