What? What is Schumer *doing*? You don't *ever* have jurors vote on a dispositive question at the *start* of a trial, as you thereby insure that they will pay virtually *no attention whatsoever* thereafter, having already decided the trial ought not proceed in the first instance.
(PS) To those saying "they already voted on that," my understanding is the prior, Rand Paul-demanded vote was a vote to proceed to an argument on the constitutional question, not a vote on the question itself.
Still, this vote benefits Trump—a lot—if he can get 34 or more votes.
(PS2) There's no question the majority of the Senate will vote that the trial is constitutional—that's not the issue. The issue is that if 34 or more Republicans vote to stop the trial they'll be able to spend the entirety of the trial calling everything Democrats do meaningless.
(PS3) The *core of Trump's defense at trial* is the constitutionality question, so if he gets 34 or more votes on the first day of the trial, his team and his supporters can honestly say that the verdict has in essence already been delivered—and everything else should be ignored.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here's the other video of Alexander marching on January 6. In this light the coat looks black, so I'll correct myself and say Alexander appears to have been in one outfit, with—maybe—a sport coat beneath his jacket that he later appeared in, in a video taken far from the Capitol.
(PS) The important questions remain: 1) Why did Alexander leave the Capitol to film from far away (i.e. at what point did he decide to desert the march he organized and the Capitol stage he set up); 2) why does Jones say Trump is coming? Paul Escandon says Jones knew he wasn't.
(PS2) So Jones is consistent: he consistently says the White House told him Trump was going to the Capitol, from three days before January 6 all the way through 2PM on January 6. And Jones clearly believed the Stop the Steal stage is where Trump was headed. Paul Escandon demurs.
On Ali Alexander: everyone agrees—see any media outlet, or Alexander's own statements—Alexander is in hiding and his whereabouts unknown. The Fort-Worth Star Telegram said on February 2 that the FBI would neither confirm nor deny investigating Alexander. star-telegram.com/news/local/for…
(PS) The problem is that the FBI never confirms or denies investigations (unless it's Comey doing so as to to Hillary). Alexander himself claims to be the star witness of the events of January 6. So yes, that the FBI is looking for him is certain. The chance they aren't is zero.
(PS2) If I had a significantly dimmer view of the FBI than I do—and my view at this point is mixed—I suppose I'd entertain the possibility that the FBI does not want to speak to the star witness in its case. But I don't, and therefore I'm not going to indulge such ridiculousness.
Does anyone know if the man in the green circle is Ali Alexander?
(PS) I ask this because I *know* the below is Ali Alexander. If the above is also, it means Alexander changed clothes and hid his face to go to the Capitol. That'd be telling.
(PS2) I ask the question above earnestly. Alex Jones and Ali Alexander were supposed to speak at the front of the Capitol. Here's a picture of Jones at the front of the Capitol just feet away from someone who may be Alexander—I'm merely asking if anyone has seen a report on this.
BREAKING NEWS: The Director of "The Steal", An Apologia for the Stop the Steal "Movement," Now Says Alex Jones—Present at Trump's Ellipse Speech—Lied to His Viewers and Capitol Police About Having Been Told Before the Ellipse Speech That Trump Would Speak at the Capitol Afterward
(PS) Paul Escandon just became a federal witness, as I understand federal investigations from having been involved in them as an investigator for a federal public defender in the past. I'm not saying he did anything wrong; he's just due an investigative visit by the FBI and ASAP.
(PS2) For any dizzy at this new development, it suggests the following: the three lead organizers of the Stop the Steal "movement"—Roger Stone, Ali Alexander, and Alex Jones—were hiding things from one another (and then the police) about their communications with the White House.
(ICYMI) PROOF offers the most comprehensive analysis of Trump's January 6 incitement-to-insurrection speech of any outlet in the United States. Below is Part II of the epic deconstruction (with a link to Part I).
(PS) Because this project is massive in scope—requiring more than 12 hours of labor—it's for full subscribers to the site. A PROOF subscription is $5/month, the lowest rate Substack lets columnists charge. sethabramson.substack.com
(PS2) I'd caution House managers not to over-focus on the word "fight"—the battlefield Trump wants (though it's not a great one for him). Equally big, as PROOF points out in its factual/legal analysis, are the words "stop," "we," "Capitol," and Trump's encouragement of trespass.
(UPDATE) Roger Stone has called me a "lying scumbag" on Gab for linking to major-media reports—including videos—detailing things he did. In one video, Stone raises money online for "protective equipment" for insurrectionists—exactly what his friend Ethan Nordean was arrested for.
(PS) I've been in touch with one of Stone's attorneys repeatedly across the years (beginning in 2018, I believe it was). If that attorney wishes to contact me via DM with a statement from Stone as to any fact I've gotten wrong, I'll be happy to publish Stone's statement on PROOF.
(PS2) My only interest—ever—is the truth, which is why I use only major-media reports and hard evidence (like videos Stone features in) when I'm stating facts. As a curatorial journalist, that's how I work. But I'm happy to publish a Stone statement if I've gotten a *fact* wrong.