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:
Liz Murrill is Rep. AG in LA. After she pointed out New Orleans officials were violating state criminal law, local officials indicted her & set $400,000 bail bond. Yet another example of big city Dems in red state using rigged grand jury system to target Republicans. 1/
2/ Fortunately, the Louisiana Supreme Court stepped in to stop this farce. It took them less than 24 hours.
THREADETTE: SCOTUS issued opinion today in case where group representing immigration judges sought to challenge in federal court rule that they had to get a supervisor's approval before speaking re immigration issues. 1/
2/ The full opinion (which is short) and Justice Thomas's concurrence are must-reads because IMNSHO they are SCOTUS first group slap to rouge judges. supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf…
🔥Pending before SCOTUS right now is petition for cert in what is one of most consequential constitutional cases related to liberty in the form of a free-market. And yet, few have taken notice of the case. In short, EPA decided who to give market share to based on "equity." 1/
@NCLAlegal 3/3 Here is the docket for those interested. It is truly appalling unelected bureaucrats are deciding whose business to kill--including taking their market share to give to so-called disadvantaged folks who never built business w/ sweat equity.