THREAD: @nytimes broke news this morning re notes of post-election meeting between Trump & top DOJ officials. nytimes.com/2021/07/30/us/… 1/
2/ This section here is absolutely damning:
3/ It reads as if the President told his DOJ to tell American public the election was corrupt even after the DOJ told him there was no evidence to back it up.
4/ But then I remember this is @nytimes. And read on....
5/ This section comes later in the article:
6/ That quote seems very close to the earlier paraphrase, leading me to wonder, did the notes really said in this order:
7/ Such notes have an entirely different meaning than both the intro
8/ And the original presentation:
9/ So which was it @nytimes: Did Trump tell DOJ to say election was corrupt in relation to no evidence off fraud or in response to DOJ saying they could discover quickly if PA had more votes than voters but that they couldn't reverse the election?
10/10 Those are 2 VERY different things. And sadly I don't trust you to report the truth, so how about posting the notes for America to judge?
Notes posted (if accurate) expose @nytimes as fake news again:
The Maryland Father's attorneys sure seemed to be playing fast and loose with the facts!
2/ Garcia: "I won't plead guilty unless you deport me to Costa Rica."
DOJ: "Well, if you insist."
Garcia: "Judge you must dismiss this case because they are forcing me to plead guilty."
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Another Trump win on appeal with D.C. Circuit vacating preliminary injunction. Order isn't loading yet so details to follow. 1/
2/ Here's what the case is about:
3/ And this isn't one of the cases where things were stayed, meaning this decision now frees the Trump Administration to get back to work. The court had originally stayed a portion of the injunction, allowing Trump to fire folks but then Plaintiffs claimed Trump didn't make individualized assessment so Court of Appeals decided it wasn't going to get into that morass and just said Trump can't fire anyone (it shouldn't have and I believe one of the judge's dissented on that cop out).
2/ So as background this is the consolidated (joined) cases involving USAID where the district court originally ordered payment of millions within like 36 hours and Justice Roberts granted an administrative stay and then said basically redo so it is feasible.
3/ The judge sorta redid and Trump has been complying, i.e., there was no stay in place so this is a WIN. Trump has also sought dismissal which should be granted based on this decision. AND the plaintiffs sought to enforce AND to depose to enforce so the ruling will 86 that!