Just a reminder that @SenRonJohnson has used his position as a conduit for Russian disinformation into official proceedings in the past. Here is my piece with @rgoodlaw on how he relied on questionably-sourced reports during the Ukraine investigation justsecurity.org/71947/how-sen-…
He also claimed back in 2018 that "an informant" had told the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee (which he headed) that a cabal within the FBI had a "secret society"...which was a lie politifact.com/article/2018/j…
And more on @SenRonJohnson's bizarre conspiracy theories, including backing "OBAMAGATE!" (which turned out to be a nothing burger) and his weird trip to Russia on *July 4*, 2018 justsecurity.org/71479/the-life…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One thing I have been thinking about since yesterday: Trump committed SO MANY impeachable offenses while in office, and he was only brought to account for three of them. Just looking back at the obstruction issues from the Mueller investigation, the multiple other legal issues 1/
stemming from the Ukraine scandal (including separation of powers and issues and violations of the law from not delivering aid as required by Congress), and the entire rap sheet stemming from the events leading up to the insurrection on January 6 2/
(consider that if the violence hadn't happened, it is unlikely there would have been articles of impeachment for TRYING TO SHAKEDOWN A STATE OFFICIAL TO FABRICATE VOTES)...like, he was lucky to ONLY be impeached twice! But it highlights a major structural problem: 3/
THREAD. A quick recap of what the evidence presented by the House Managers have shown, and what a (real) defense would have to address to rebut it:
2. First, CAUSATION. The House lawyers demonstrated the causal link between Trump’s words and actions and the violence that resulted. To wit: lies beginning months before election about it being rigged, to foment anger; insurrectionists saying they were acting on Trump’s words;
3. and (this was key) active participation and involvement by Trump and WH with groups already known to engage in violent activity for January 6 event, including the change in plan to have a March from Ellipse to Capitol right as votes were starting
THREAD. I had to take a little break from political Twitter to gather my thoughts on how the GOP is responding to impeachment. I find that in the face of gaslighting, it is useful to repeat things that we know to be true, and then assess the choices from there. To wit:
2. TRUTH #1: Donald Trump did not win the 2020 election. He could not accept this outcome. Because of his inability to accept this outcome, he manufactured a Big Lie that he *did* win the election, and put all of the official powers at his disposal to force this to be the case
3. TRUTH #2: As part of this effort, he attempted to 1) shakedown the Secretary of State of Georgia to manufacture 11,780 "extra" votes that would give him a victory in that state; 2) conspired with officials at DOJ to manufacture false cases of voter fraud in Georgia
Very good piece about the failure of elite institutions to inculcate civic virtue and values. Part of the problem is that admissions criteria values things like sports, awards, etc. They can change that by placing value on demostrated civic engagement theconstitutionalist.org/2021/01/12/eli…
BTW, civic engagement is more than just volunteerism. Actually, rate of volunteering is very high among younger gen. Great. But civic engagement = participating in activities that teach democratic skills, like using process to create change, debating, advocacy
So participating in local counsels, writing for the paper, running for office of civic organizations, etc. as well as volunteering and helping the needy. Just important to think of civic engagement as bigger than just "helping people" -- it's participating in democracy
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.