(1) Dems are thrilled about this bc they believe Dominion will win the suit. IDC much about Lindell or his claims, but I do know that if you're not careful what you say, you can walk right into legal liability & end up with no credibility &, often, no money. Hope it was worth it.
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1351310913807257600
(2) And now I will provide context and background, bc there's never enough space in one tweet to do that.
I realize Mike Lindell is making claims about the election fraud that all sensible people can see happened. The nature of the fraud is that there were multiple parts to it.
I realize Mike Lindell is making claims about the election fraud that all sensible people can see happened. The nature of the fraud is that there were multiple parts to it.
(3) I agree that a large number of those fraud methods occurred in certain states (and in some cases, potentially in all states.) It's become very difficult to find reliable, accurate, sufficiently detailed information on all these cases.
(4) I think that some of the fraud claims made by Lindell, other Trump movement public figures, and Trump himself, would not stand up to scrutiny. That doesn't automatically mean the Democrat narrative is factual. Not at all.
(5) Today I've been reading the transcript of the President's remarks at the Ellipse on 1/6/21. It's true that the Capitol rioters could not have been physically at the Ellipse then the Capitol in the short time between the end of his speech & the first crossing of police lines.
(6) But this line of argument was the dumbest possible way to try to defend Trump's actions or omissions wrt 1/6.
IMHO, pretty much everything he's done (or not done, that he should have) since 1/6 makes it difficult to support his current views without becoming hypocritical.
IMHO, pretty much everything he's done (or not done, that he should have) since 1/6 makes it difficult to support his current views without becoming hypocritical.
(7) That just a personal choice I've made, based on what I've observed over the past 5 years in "political Twitter."
It totally sucks that Ds, with a little bit of help from some Rs in state governments, have managed to get into a position to carry out PRC policies in the US.
It totally sucks that Ds, with a little bit of help from some Rs in state governments, have managed to get into a position to carry out PRC policies in the US.
(8) That doesn't just dismantle the Trump legacy, it dismantles many of the things the USA needs in order to protect national security and fully rebuild the rule of law.
There will be many more deaths than there otherwise would be.
There will be many more deaths than there otherwise would be.
(9) President Trump could have done a lot of things to limit the damage, throughout 2020 and, after the election.
There were things he knew about that his followers did not know about.
It's going to be a long time before we get access to records from this time period.
There were things he knew about that his followers did not know about.
It's going to be a long time before we get access to records from this time period.
(10) I'm not referring to the "declassify" stuff that y'all are hoping we get to see before Trump leaves office.
I'm talking about information that he received as President, that could have helped us do more before election day to prevent or address election fraud. And also:
I'm talking about information that he received as President, that could have helped us do more before election day to prevent or address election fraud. And also:
(12) Information about government policies and so on, that wasn't related to the election itself.
Like most other people, before election day I assumed that Trump was fully using the available powers of his office to enforce the relevant laws by which the states must abide.
Like most other people, before election day I assumed that Trump was fully using the available powers of his office to enforce the relevant laws by which the states must abide.
(13) Yes, there are federal laws about state election processes, and a POTUS has a duty to see that they are enforced.
He also had a duty (within the law) to tell us what was happening.
He also had a duty (within the law) to tell us what was happening.
(14) When POTUS and VP Pence spoke on election night, they projected a sense of confidence that if their win did not start to become apparent then everything in their power as candidates would be done to successfully contest the results.
All I hear about this matter is excuses.
All I hear about this matter is excuses.
(15) IMO, the lawful contesting of the election results needed to be much more effectively led, from day one. And the President should have ensured the level and type of information flow to the public was a lot stronger.
I said this at the time.
I said this at the time.
(16) It's now possible to draw conclusions on why these things were not done to the required standard. (Reminder, no excuses: they had the money, and the support from competent attorneys, & data & comms professionals around the country.)
(17) I have now drawn the conclusion that from election night onward, Trump saw an ongoing protest movement as a viable last resort option. He is surely intelligent enough to know that was a very high risk strategy. Ds must have thought their wildest dreams had come true. 
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
