Another point re @NathanBacaTV article: wusa9.com/article/news/i… The distinction b/w clearing Lafayette Park and other areas is blurred. And from his article D.C. officials still haven't said whether tear gas used outside of Lafayette Park. Why not?
The more I think about this, the more this seems an important question: D.C. Police continue to say they did not participate in clearing of Lafayette Park, but from article D.C. officials have yet to say whether they used tear gas to clear areas outside Park. Instead, D.C. cops
2/ are trying to get the case dismissed WITHOUT that fact being disclosed, but arguing no violation of constitutional rights EVEN IF THEY used tear gas. Why is that? Why won't D.C. officials say whether tear gas used outside Lafayette Park by D.C. Police???
3/ I'm digging in more because I had wrongly believed D.C. officials denied using tear gas on protestors on June 1, but per @NathanBacaTV article, district officials refused to answer. So, re-reading District motion to dismiss see D.C. officials had no problem saying this:
4/ Point blank said they did not clear protestors from Lafayette Park. (Need to see what complaint said--maybe it wasn't alleged that they had?). But when it comes to tear gas, attorney's argue (as they must) that even if they did use tear gas, it was not unconstitutional:
5/ To reiterate: This references tear gas outside of Lafayette Park. And if D.C. officials succeed on motion to dismiss, no fact finding and no answer re whether D.C. officials used tear gas. Now I'm intrigued.
6/ Why are district officials refusing to say whether D.C. police used tear gas on June 1? (Again, I had wrongly believed D.C. officials had previously denied using tear gas on June 1--assuming @NathanBacaTV reporting is accurate on that point, they didn't. Digging more.
7/ So, the Third Amended Complaint alleged D.C. officials acted outside of Lafayette Park, and thus the Motion to Dismiss would, of course, say that. But, still, why have D.C. officials refused to answer the basic question of whether they used tear gas outside Lafayette Park 6/1

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Margot Cleveland

Margot Cleveland Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ProfMJCleveland

1 Jun
BREAKING: Official spokesperson from D.C. MPD confirmed in writing that MPD officers deployed tear gas on June 1, 2021. In court proceedings, MPD's brief accepted as true the Plaintiffs' allegation. 1/ thefederalist.com/2021/06/01/bow…
2/ Had the MPD succeeded on its Motion to Dismiss, it never would have been forced to reveal whether it used tear gas. Last week, @NathanBacaTV reported that MPD's attorney admitted in oral argument that MPD had used tear gas, but given stage of procedure,
3/ And fact that MPD did not admit that in its brief OR previously, that seemed unlikely.
Read 6 tweets
30 May
THREAD-HUGELY IMPORTANT: While without seeing the transcript, I can only be 99% sure, but I am 99% sure this is 100% FALSE. SO, journalists, and "jouralists" before retweeting or writing an article parroting this claim, READ. THIS. THREAD.
2/ Here's the lede. BUT what exactly did the attoney say? First, the reporters paraphrase and then the actual words:
3/ What the attorney said IS NOT--REPEAT--is NOT an admission that the DC Police used tear gas. And here it's important to understand both the law and court procedures: The DC Police Officers were sued and the Plaintiffs ALLEGED tear gas was used:
Read 27 tweets
30 May
THREAD: My 92-year-old mom was talking in her sleep last night: "Charles, where's Rose?" she asked. Charles was her brother who, after Pearl Harbor, claimed he was 18 so he could enlist--as his mom, my grandmother refused to agree. He trained in Washington state. 1/
2/ My grandmother hitchhiked there from Michigan for Christmas b/c "my boy's not going to spend Christmas alone." He was Army, infintry, originally, but after discovering his superior swimming skills he became a Ranger.
3/ He earned a Silver Star for volunteering to swim ashore ahead of the landing at Anzio to mark the landing site. He succeeded and survived, only months later to be killed by shrapnel while eating with his unit outside. My grandmother refused to believe he died for years,
Read 9 tweets
26 May
Oh, my heart! DS's "very best friend" when he was 3 was a stuffed Very Hungry Caterpillar.
Quilt I made DS for his birthday.
Birthday theme with balloon Hungry.
Read 4 tweets
14 May
THREADETTE: TFW you see this Tweet and realize it's being promoted by the same editor who found National Review and The Federalist "not reliable." 1/
3/ And here was the article that was not just reliable but prescient. thefederalist.com/2019/03/26/tim…
Read 4 tweets
10 May
Dang: Her insights have evaported!
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(