So Schumer should (I hope is) asking Mitch for agreement that the insurgents are stripped of committee positions, w/o replacements for the GOP (as a way to incent GOP to replace them).
This piece from @JameelJaffer makes a number of outright errors in his argument that the case against Assange is dangerous. The case IS dangerous. So is misrepresenting the facts in Assange's defense.
@JameelJaffer Key to the problem--one fostered by propaganda Assange used in his extradition hearing--is the suggestion that Assange was charged BECAUSE the Trump admin made decisions Obama wouldn't. Nope. The public records shows that Obama Admin ALSO had a changed understanding of him.
@JameelJaffer Baraister's ruling on the 3 publication charges is likewise dangerous (tho unsurprising given the law and UK's Official Secrets Act). But the rest of her ruling clearly distinguished what Assange did from what journalists do.
As noted, when Collins texted the WH for help, Trump only encouraged the insurgents. She uses the term, incitement, that is the article of impeachment.
It's really amazing when you realize that the better part of thousands of insurgents who stormed the Capitol have no fucking clue how FBI investigations work and how much evidence they left out there.
Imagine videos with the detail and scope of the one @igorbobic took, but from each of, say, 750 cameras in Congress, matched to micro cell sites, matched to your own idiotic social media posts.
And that's before they get a warrant on your inadequately deleted phone.
Lots of people are talking about the dual exploitation of Parler, one via scrape, one via hack.
Given how the deplatforming worked over a few days, FBI had time to ask, say, Amazon, to mirror the whole thing so they can come back with individualized warrants.