@JMichaelWaller you are right to recall Grant administration, but you and everyone else are missing an elephant in the room. The ONLY out-of-office impeachment in US history was of Secretary of War in Grant administration who enforced Reconstruction (Belknap).
@JMichaelWaller 2/ Democrats took control of House in 1874 and sought to discredit Grant administration. Belknap resigned over allegations of corruption. Many other corruption cases in US history. Why was Belknap impeached out of office? More relentless pursuit than any other official.
@JMichaelWaller 3/ apply usual test: cui bono? Democrats were then dominated by Jim Crow advocates. Impeachment of Belknap undermined the party of Lincoln in 1876 elections, which were closest in US history and not decided until crooked agreement in March 1877.
@JMichaelWaller 4/ the Democrat candidate was ahead 184-165 with 20 electoral votes contested. In the Great Compromise/Betrayal, Rutherford Hayes agreed to Democrat demands for retraction of Reconstruction and withdrawal of federal troops from south, following which Jim Crow policies instituted.
@JMichaelWaller 5/ so the previous out-of-office impeachment - of Grant administration's Secretary of War responsible for Reconstruction in south - led directly to end of Reconstruction and adoption of Jim Crow policies in South. You'd think this would be worth pointing out in Trump defense.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
in all my life, I've never seen a Globe and Mail front page like this. Vaccine deliveries to Canada have collapsed. Provinces have set up distribution but have NOTHING to distribute. Total fiasco.
2/ federal government's information page on vaccination to date and future deliveries hasn't been updated in two weeks. canada.ca/en/public-heal…
3/ Canada dependent on vaccines from EU, which were cut to zero for us (but no one else). EU instituted export controls, so Trudeau's ostentatious rollout plans are now in dust.
Both Lindsey Graham and Bill Barr professed particular concern over why Crossfire Hurricane wasn't reeled in as a result of Primary Subsource testimony in Jan 2017 and promised to investigate.
2/ on Apr 27, 2020, Graham made a well-constructed request to DOJ for the key FBI memos and texts that would document FBI's reception of PSS/Danchenko testimony which ought to have raised concern about fraud in Steele dossier judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/rele…
3/ only ONE relevant document has been produced: the EC on the Jan 2017 interview with PSS/Danchenko, which is arguably the single most important document on Russiagate hoax thus far made available.
Matthew Petti, in Reason magazine reason.com/2021/01/10/why… asks the sensible question "Why is America still in Syria?", but falsely stated that "Trump brought chaos to a region already on the brink". While I am very disappointed in Trump's failure to disentangle, it is ludicrous
2/ to blame Trump admin for chaos initiated under Obama regime. In late 2016, ISIS (grey) controlled vast swathes of Iraq and Syria, while AlQaeda and allies controlled northwest and southwest Syria. Syria's largest city, Aleppo, partly controlled by AlQaeda.
3/ Trump did not "bring chaos" to Syria. It was Obama admin which tried to carry out regime change in Syria, in a program in which it out-sourced "ground game", recklessly arming jihadis and militants until both AlQaeda and ISIS were formidable forces.
2/ the second day portion of 302 appears to begin on page 15 with FBI recording Steele's statement that "sub-sources are not paid for information". Indeed, sometimes (e.g. Millian), PSS never even met or talked to supposed "sub-source".
3/ notwithstanding Steele's claim, Danchenko has previously told FBI that he had sought help from Orbis to assist Source 1(Abyshev)'s [daughter?] in obtaining a "scholarship for language courses". However, FBI didn't challenge Steele on this.
2/ Steyn, for the most part, stayed out of the complicated SLAAP proceedings, holding his fire for the Summary Judgement phase. I'm not going to review or precis these documents, but will quote a couple of sizzling early paragraphs.
3/ Steyn notes that court previously identified issue as whether Penn State conducted "inadequate and ineffective investigations into their employees, including Sandusky and Mann". Steyn: "it has been thoroughly adjudicated" and Mann's mentor "is heading to jail".
As recently pointed out by Alan Dershowitz, the kangaroo court proceedings being pushed through by Congress are violation of constitutional prohibition against "bills of attainder". Which are explained here: law.cornell.edu/constitution-c…
2/ in the past, prohibition against legislatures purporting to exercise judicial authority without observing usual forms of evidence have been interpreted strictly by US courts. Seems obvious - why haven't Trump's lawyers done something about it?
3/ Read language carefully: bill of attainder clause said to "prohibit all legislative acts, “no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial".