Gravely concerning that Florida law enforcement is not pursuing obvious misconduct. GOP spoiler candidate schemes, Joel Greenberg’s crimes went unpunished—and uninvestigated—at the state level. What is going on with Florida law enforcement?
There is one exception, and that is Miami-Dade’s prosecution of a GOP spoiler candidate scheme. But they referred similar schemes to other prosecutors—who ignored them. Multiple reports about Greenberg also went uninvestigated for years.

Why? Is a special prosecutor needed?
Important to note the investigation related to this article only began after great journalists at the Orlando Sentinel pressed Florida Department of Law Enforcement on why it hadn’t looked into obvious ties between entities connected to this spoiler candidate and GOP operatives.
Greenberg was never charged with one crime until a victim went to the Feds and begged them to do something. The Feds looked into it and charged him with harassment and stalking. A year (and many additional charges) later, he pleaded guilty to embezzlement, human trafficking, etc.
But at least two sources went to Florida investigators over several years and told them Greenberg had engaged in misconduct. Nothing was done, and there is no sign they even pursued a serious investigation.
A cursory look at Greenberg’s spending as tax collector would have revealed a massive amount of bizarre contracts to friends, associates, etc. You know, things investigators like to pursue. The Sentinel reported on many of those, too.

No state investigation materialized. Why?
All this to say that newspapers like the Sentinel—and it’s southern neighbor, the Miami Herald—are pushing harder for investigations into quite obvious corruption and unlawful misconduct than Florida law enforcement appears to be. And that is really, really not good.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Robert J. DeNault

Robert J. DeNault 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!


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 @robertjdenault

16 Sep
Call me crazy but I’d really like the government to explain (or at least have a coherent theory for) the Trump Org-Alfa Bank server connections before they start prosecuting the people who reported them to the FBI. Can we get just one coherent explanation? So far we have 0.
Here are the 3 we’ve gotten:

1. Trump Org: it was spam email

2. Senate Intelligence Cmte: we cannot make sense of it and Trump Org/Alfa explanations aren’t consistent

3. Alfa Bank: malicious actors faked them! (but cannot explain how they faked activity on Trump Org end)
Trump Org’s explaner can’t be true if Alfa’s is true.

Alfa’s doesn’t answer why Trump Org added new lookup to the server after NYT asked Alfa’s lobbyist—but not Trump Org—about the first one in 2016 nor how anyone faking comms could know Trump Org added it and how to look it up.
Read 4 tweets
31 Aug
Still waiting on apologies from everyone who promoted an unsourced rumor that SDNY beefed up security last Friday for a “big announcement” that never came.

Discussing investigations is good but stop politicizing prosecutions for RT’s. It’s dangerous (and exactly what Trump did).
Here’s the difference between discussing investigations vs. politicizing prosecutions:

- we talk about investigations we know are real

- when you talk about “imminent prosecutions,” those are not real unless a reliable source has said otherwise
With complex investigations there is often evidence in the public sphere that helps explain them. I think it’s good to discuss them.

Hyping up criminal prosecutions of people is usually not based on facts. It’s argumentative, it’s emotional. It’s *political.*
Read 4 tweets
31 Aug
Madison Cawthorn has now threatened violence if his preferred ‘election security’ policies aren’t adopted, telling audience bloodshed will result if changes aren’t made and that he will “pick up arms” (even though he’d “dread” it). It’s a clear threat. There should be discipline.
Cawthorn says 1/6 defendants are “political prisoners” and that DC doesn’t want “mass protests.”

Worse: when asked when he’d call MAGA fans back to Washington, he said he was “actively working on it,” that he has “a few plans in motion” that he “cannot make public right now.”
For those who don’t remember, Cawthorn was one of few Representatives who spoke at the 1/6 rally.
Read 5 tweets
3 Aug
NYC requiring vaccines opens the door to a lawsuit where courts will either affirm the principle set out in Jacobson v. Massachusetts in 1905 (required vaccines are fine as long as they don’t “go beyond what is reasonably required for the safety of the public”) or reverse it.
There have already been a number of cases that invoked Jacobson to uphold requirements during the Covid-19 pandemic. As recently as this week a case brought by Indiana University was dismissed by an 11th Circuit panel (all Republican appointees, too) citing Jacobson.
But two reasons NYC rule is different:

1) requires vaccines for using private establishments.

2) it is more similar to the facts of Jacobson than a narrower scenario like a public college or federal workforce vaccination requirement.
Read 5 tweets
13 Jul
FWIW, there was a lot of suspicion around the 2016 election. Democrats never tried to overthrow Congress.

The swiftness and ease with which “conservatives” tossed away law and order, and their leaders excused it or whitewashed it, is pathetically traitorous.
The reality is that Democrats followed the rule book. They did not immediately launch impeachment proceedings. They let Mueller do his job. They let him testify on his—and Barr’s—terms. They didn’t move to oust Trump over 2016.
Read 5 tweets
12 Jul
Michigan sanctions hearing is the most fulfilling dismantling of The Big Lie we’ve gotten yet. Judge going line by line, exhibit by exhibit asking which attorneys were responsible for which outrageous submissions to the court. I highly recommend finding the stream on YouTube.
For anyone interested:…
As someone studying for the bar, it’s a good reminder of procedural rules about sanctions and submissions to the court.

Before you even *become* a lawyer you learn that you have to reasonably investigate a claim you put into a pleading. These folks seem to have forgotten that.
Read 5 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!