THREAD: the DoJ may be able to indict trump for obstruction of justice because of Bob Mueller. We just learned that the DoJ under Merrick Garland has reached an agreement on the testimony of Don McGahn. 1/ politico.com/news/2021/05/1…
We don’t know what the agreement is, but we know it was made without consulting trump, and that he isn’t party to the agreement. Plus, @tedlieu has tweeted that he looks forward to McGahn answering their questions. So it seems there’ll be testimony. 2/
Many are concerned McGahn will simply “not recall” anything, but that will be considerably difficult given the documented depositions taken by Mueller and outlined in his report. Many asked why Mueller bothered with the investigation if he knew he wasn’t going to indict trump 3/
Mueller responded that it was necessary to document the evidence and take testimony while everything was fresh in the minds of the witnesses. That’s about to come in very fucking handy, wouldn’t you say? 4/
Many others said Mueller failed b/c he refused to say that trump criminally obstructed justice. The fact that he didn’t is also about to pay off. Had Mueller accused trump of a crime w/o trump being able to defend himself in a court of law, Donnie would walk free on appeal 5/
Finally, many were upset that mueller didn’t follow the money. Had he, he could have been fired, and we wouldn’t have the supporting evidence to properly question McGahn 2 years later 6/
So if congress makes a criminal referral of obstruction to THIS attorney general based on McGahn’s testimony with the supporting evidence in the Mueller report, we could see an indictment - or four - of the former guy. All because Mueller “failed”. END
NEW: the McGahn agreement is out. As I suspected, the Mueller report is the key. I know you’re probably upset that this won’t be public, but it doesn’t need to be if Garland does the right thing. assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2070…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREAD: time for a trip down memory lane about Barr and his refusal to prosecute the former guy for obstruction in light of Judge Jackson (if you’re nasty) ordering the DoJ to release the “memo” Barr said gave him the authority to make the call. 1/ apnews.com/article/politi…
First, here’s how often I joked about Barr’s “OLC memos” 2/
And that one time I called for Barr’s impeachment. This was the same month I was removed from my job in the federal government. 3/
BREAKING: the judge in the Chauvin case - while discussing a motion for mistrial - said that Maxine Waters' comments about the Chauvin case may give the defense something on appeal to overturn a conviction. It's abhorrent, but not prejudicial, however. Motion denied.
Allow me to clarify. These are the judges words. Not mine. Also, the prosecution argued that the defense's claims are vague and they have no direct evidence that THIS jury is tainted by or even heard the news...
The judge repeated to the defense that he instructed the jury multiple times NOT to listen to the news. The prosecution argued that should satisfy the requirements to deny the motion, which the judge did...
NEW: Roger Stone may be closer to arrest than you think. From Reuters, 4 leaders of the proud boys have been hit with superseding indictments for conspiracy. BURIED LEDE: There is an un-indicted co-conspirator. I think it's Roger Stone. Here's why... 1/ reuters.com/article/us-usa…
The 4 proud boys charged here are considered the leaders of their respective states' groups. I predicted they would be charged with conspiracy back in January b/c of this WaPo report. You can also hear it on my Feb 1st episode of the @dailybeanspod 2/. washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
That SAME DAY we reported the above WaPo story, we reported that rep Val Demmings called to investigate the January 5th meeting at trump international. This is important to what I'm about to discuss regarding the un-indicted co-conspirator. 3/
THOUGHTS on the Postmaster General. THREAD. ATTN: @HouseDemocrats. I REALLY want to hear testimony from the former Postmaster General Megan Brennan. Those who listen to our podcasts will remember she retired in October of 2019. 1/
You'll also remember that starting in May of 2018, donald personally pushed her to DOUBLE the rates on Amazon, which as we know was run by Jeff Bezos who also owns the Washington Post. A clear and impeachable abuse of power, btw. 2/
Trump had told aides several times he wanted her gone in his quest to privatize the USPS. Officials insisted her retirement was a regular old retirement and wasn't about the pressure donald put on her to break contracts with Amazon. 3/
THREAD: My thoughts on the decision not to call witnesses. Please correct me if I'm wrong. This take is based on what I think I know, and there's much I don't know, but I do not understand why the dems didn't depose Rep. Beutler. Let's talk about the objections: 1/
First, many are saying it would drag this thing out and prevent Biden's agenda from moving forward. I don't see how that's possible. The senate had the votes to depose Rep. Beutler. We saw that with the 55-45 vote to allow witnesses. GOP can't filibuster that 2/
It would have taken probably a week to depose her and introduce her testimony into the senate record. The senate is scheduled to be in recess this week. The only thing a deposition of Beutler would have done is stopped the senate's vacation. 3/