FBI has two modes: Reactive and proactive. We are hearing right now what they have done/are doing REactively. I have no doubt they will be excellent. But the question is: What did they miss in their PROactivity capacity, and why??? (Appear to be avoiding this) 1/
The entire point of many post 9/11 reforms was to enhance the FBI’s proactive capabilities. It is true that, particularly in a purely domestic context, the nat sec/civil liberties balance will heavily favor the latter. But it does not leave them impotent 2/
It’s hard to believe (based on what transpired) that they did not get enough critical info beforehand that crossed the free speech/criminal intent line to warrant better preparation.
I would like to add that I am a little shocked that the prepared remarks did not address the future threats to the capitals of all 50 states WHICH THE FBI PUT OUT. What on earth.
*threat assessments of the threat to the capitals of all 50 states

• • •

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

Keep Current with Asha Rangappa

Asha Rangappa 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 @AshaRangappa_

11 Jan
Seriously what is even going on? Two days ago a senior FBI official said that they had no indication of any violence. ??? Today, reports (see below) that they sent a threat assessment to Capitol police. This is...inconsistent 1/ nbcnews.com/news/crime-cou…
What made my head explode was this graf (from article linked in previous tweet)...?!?!? So FBI was aware of people who intended to travel across state lines to engage in violence and managed to “discourage” them. Umm...why weren’t they *arrested*?????
It just makes no sense. Director Wray has testified several times — to Trump’s dismay — that right wing groups are the greatest domestic threat. So clearly he’s not afraid to take action, even if he might get fired. How did the ball get dropped?? 3/
Read 5 tweets
9 Jan
THREAD. I am failing to see any better path for Trump apart from resignation. (Yes, I know you will say, "He'll never do that" but also did you ever think three days ago that he'd be impeached twice?) Here's me as HIS (competent) lawyer:
2. You will be impeached. Your goal now is to avoid criminal liability, and, if possible, jail time. If you resign now, you avoid several unpleasant possibilities. For one, you make the potential for an invocation of the 25th amendment, on the basis that you are CRAZY, moot
3. If you resign, and Mike Pence becomes President, he will likely give you a limited, but nevertheless broad, pardon. If he emulates Ford's pardon for Nixon, you will be pardoned for (at the very least) obstruction of justice in the Mueller investigation
Read 14 tweets
4 Jan
The lowest predicate for opening an FBI investigation is whether there is "information or an allegation" that a person has violated federal law. The higher standard is whether there are "specific articulable facts" that a person has violated federal law. Both have been met here.
It's important to remember that investigating and prosecuting are two different things. There may be reasons that Biden's AG choose not to *prosecute* Trump for crimes he may have committed, taking into account various factors -- that is prosecutorial discretion 2/
But the FBI is duty-bound to investigate violations of federal law if they have any basis to believe that a crime has occurred. they don't get to pick and choose. This was articulated in the Mueller Report, in explaining why they investigated obstruction 3/
Read 5 tweets
24 Dec 20
THREAD. Remember that Manafort was the linchpin of Russia’s efforts with the Trump campaign. He was the one with direct contacts with Russian intel. He was the one sharing info with them. He was the one who owed a Russian oligarch $10m...but worked for the campaign for free 1/
Manafort initially claimed to be cooperating with Mueller. But he wasn’t: In fact he was secretly continuing to do work for Ukraine, tampering with witnesses, and lying to Mueller’s team. Mueller discovered that Trump had been dangling a pardon behind the scenes 2/
Manafort was in a position to spill ALL THE BEANS. He was pushing Russian disinfo (that Ukraine interfered in the election) as far back as 2016. He was sharing campaign polling data with Russian intel. Writing in “code” to his Russian oligarch debtor 3/ vox.com/2017/9/20/1634…
Read 6 tweets
10 Dec 20
Foreign intelligence agents often make approaches to people in power (remember Russian spy, Maria Butina?). The question is, when they learn from the FBI that they are unwittingly being targeted, do they cease all contact? Swalwell did. Can’t say the same about Carter Page & Co.
Just to emphasize, Carter Page was warned that he was being targeted by Russian intelligence. So was the Trump campaign. And Senator Ron Johnson. NONE of them cut off contact...they doubled down (and in the case of the Trump campaign, later concealed and lied about it to the FBI)
I’ll add: The FBI typically gives a defensive briefing/warning when they believe you are being UNWITTINGLY targeted. If they think you are knowingly participating, they will quietly monitor you to gather more info (and in some cases open a criminal investigation)
Read 4 tweets
1 Dec 20
According to this appointment letter, Durham's investigation did develop into "a" criminal investigation (my money is on a leak investigation). This appointment letter allows that investigation to continue to its conclusion 1/
There is also a broad authorization to investigate whether anyone in the Russia probe broke the law, but the Special Counsel regs state that the appointment requires it to state the "specific factual matter to be investigated" and that seems kind of vague (and also 2/
after all this time I would think if there were more illegal activity Durham would have uncovered, I would think/hope. In any case, keep in mind that once a new AG comes in s/he would have to authorize any further major investigative steps taken by Durham 3/
Read 5 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!