Wall Street Journal Editorial Board:

1. Details officers’ compelling testimony before @January6thCmte

2. Tells GOP leaders to cede “weak ground by admitting that the election wasn’t stolen and Mr. Trump was wrong” for his acts and omissions on #Jan6

wsj.com/articles/jan-6…
3. Identifies key questions that should be answered:

“Questions remain about the Capitol’s unpreparedness and Mr. Trump’s response as the violence unfolded.”

“why the Capitol was so badly protected on Jan. 6… [the Select Committee] should examine that in detail.”
4. On Stefanik (named) and McCarthy-Jim Jordan (unnamed) rhetoric:

“What kind of voter is this supposed to convince? … Hardly credible to point to [security oversights] alone, without acknowledging that President Trump urged his supporters to stop the supposed steal…”
5. But then WSJ argues it’s false to say constitutional order was so threatened on Jan 6. “Gives mob far too much credit.”

Hmmm

What if mob killed Vice President?
What if Trump used military as Milley feared?
What if the bombs detonated?
What if Oath Keepers used weapons cache?

• • •

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

Keep Current with Ryan Goodman

Ryan Goodman 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 @rgoodlaw

26 Jul
It's a true honor to team up with the brilliant @BarbMcQuade and @JoyceWhiteVance on this.

Just published: "Questions the January 6 Select Committee Should Ask Its Witnesses"

Identifying 35 witnesses
Dozens of questions

<Thread> of some highlights...

justsecurity.org/77588/question…
2. Among many Qs for FBI

Why did Norfolk report warning of “war” at Capitol not get elevated to senior FBI including Wray?

Why did Parler warnings sent to FBI of threats of violence at Capitol not get elevated to Wray?

Does Wray acknowledge the gaps are intelligence failures?
3. Questions that get at specific (not abstract) comparisons between FBI’s handling of #BLM protests and #Jan6.👇
Read 8 tweets
19 Jul
Items in @CarolLeonnig @PhilipRucker book that Pentagon OMITTED in #Jan6 Timeline it released to public.

Joint Chiefs' #GenMilley recommended calling up neighboring National Guard units immediately (Army Sec. McCarthy doesn't get around to it until 2.5hrs after Capitol breached)
2. Especially egregious by DoD:

On left (book excerpt):

2:30pm meeting: Milley recommends "send out a call for National Guard reinforcements from the nearby states."

On right (Pentagon's timeline):

2:30pm meeting was about DC Guard.

4:18pm meeting about other states' Guards.
3. Here's another omission in DoD Timeline.

On left (book excerpt):

4:39pm call between Acting SecDef Miller and White House chief of staff Meadows (plus @LeaderMcConnell joins call and sounds furious)

On right (Pentagon's timeline):

Blank, nada, nothing to see here
Read 8 tweets
15 Jul
Apparent Kremlin documents leak.

“There is also apparent confirmation that the Kremlin possesses kompromat, or potentially compromising material…collected-the document says–from Trump’s earlier ‘non-official visits to Russian Federation territory.’”

theguardian.com/world/2021/jul…
2. “There is a brief psychological assessment of Trump, who is described as an ‘impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex.’”
3. “Western intelligence agencies are understood to have been aware of the documents for some months and to have carefully examined them. The papers, seen by the Guardian, seem to represent a serious and highly unusual leak from within the Kremlin.”
Read 5 tweets
12 Jul
<thread>

In a brief to DC Circuit, Biden admin had a choice to make: Whether to recognize due process rights apply to detainees at #Guantanamo.

The answer:

Defense Dept:✅
State Dept:✅
Intelligence agencies:✅

Justice Dept:❌

@charlie_savage reports:
nytimes.com/2021/07/09/us/…
2. I just published this analysis

"Had the Justice Department wanted to recognize that the Constitution’s due process clause applies to detainees held at Guantanamo, the brief would have essentially written itself."

The Supreme Court has already spoken.
justsecurity.org/77386/what-the…
3. My analysis is largely doctrinal but I do make a couple policy points:

The Justice Department's position undercuts @JoeBiden and @SecDef's stated goal of closing the prison.

@SenatorDurbin, Chair of Senate Judiciary, letter to Justice Department pointed this out. 👇
Read 6 tweets
9 Jul
<thread>

@KaraScannell @eorden interviewed attorneys about #Weisselberg.

Very consistent with @AWeissmann_'s analysis @just_security

— pressures Weisselberg to flip to protect his family
— signals to potential cooperators
— indicting org now makes sense
cnn.com/2021/07/09/pol…
2. Former U.S. tax prosecutor @AGOSTINOLAW:

Vance "sent a message that this is an exit ramp for Weisselberg that he should have taken already and, if he doesn't, everything he knows and loves in this world is fair game."
3. Criminal defense attorney @brianeklein:

"Prosecutors don't directly threaten to charge a family member, but it's not uncommon that that implicit threat hangs out there .... It can't be lost on Allen Weisselberg ... ... that family members might ...come under investigation."
Read 4 tweets
9 Jul
<thread>

After first waves of commentary on #Weisselberg indictment, I sat down with @AWeissmann_.

Several important insights by him:

1. Prosecutors have another option to obtain Weisselberg testimony if he does not cooperate.

justsecurity.org/77369/how-to-r…
2. Weissmann: "After Weisselberg is prosecuted...the prosecution can put him in the grand jury and compel him to testify."

That option is also discussed in #SistersInLaw podcast (@KimberlyEAtkins @JillWineBanks @JoyceWhiteVance @BarbMcQuade)

politicon.com/podcasts/trump…
3. Weissmann details why he thinks (a) the content of the indictment, (b) the prosecutors' requests in the arraignment hearing, and (c) the press conference by defense attorneys points toward a criminal investigation with much more to come.
Read 7 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!

:(