This Oleg Deripaska news is a BFD. Take a huge step back and realize what it means when the FBI performs a ‘law enforcement activity’ at 2 separate locations owned by the same individual. A wee thread for perspective 🧵👇🏻 nbcnews.com/politics/justi…
Todays FBI ‘activity’ had to have been a coordinated effort. The field offices would have been in communication, planning, sharing information. They would have had to have some probable cause for this to have occurred. They would have also needed permission, perhaps warrants.
Those warrants would have had to be signed off on. Merrick Garland himself, would more than likely have been in the loop on something like this especially for someone like Deripaska who has been sanctioned by the Treasury Dept.
But why now? After all this time, why now? Is this because there was always cause but now we have an AG willing to enforce our laws? Remains to be seen. But it could be because someone is cooperating and they now have new information that gave them that cause?
Pure speculation time. To answer the why now question, could it be that Deripaska made donations to the Inauguration Fund chaired by Tom Barrack? abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclu…
You may remember Tom Barrack from such indictments as 👇🏻
The article above mentioned foreign donations to trump’s inaugural fund coming from Russia, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Tom Barrack was indicted for acting as a foreign agent of UAE. This article includes the name of one his co-defendants in that case. arkansasonline.com/news/2018/dec/…
Here is more information on the Presidential Inauguration Committee.
But Joe, you’re kind of all over the place here, how does any of this tie to Deripaska? In the below article, it mentions Barrack’s UAE connections and a reminder that 🗣it was BARRACK WHO RECOMMENDED PAUL MANAFORT TO BE TRUMPS CAMPAIGN MANAGER.
As I said, this is all sheer speculation on my part. I don’t know if the FBI acted on information obtained from Tom Barrack. I do know that Tom Barrack put up $250,000,000.00 to stay out of jail. cnn.com/2021/07/23/pol…
As I said, this was about perspective. We are all clamoring for justice, for Merrick Garland to do something. This is a something. And if it came from Barrack, it is a big effing something.
END
Today’s House Rules committee met to further proceed on the recommendation of the @January6thCmte to refer Steve Bannon for criminal contempt of Congress. @BennieGThompson and @RepLizCheney both testified about democracy and accountability. But then🧵👇🏻
Sheriff shoot-n-holler and the Animated Sugar Daddy both came in to testify. That’s the unjacketed Jim Jordan and Ice cream enthusiast Matt Gaetz respectively. It was wild, you should really watch the whole thing. But what caught my ear was Gaetz using Steve Bannon’s words.
Gaetz said to ‘catch the signal, and not the noise.’ Ok, then. What did Gaetz and Jordan ‘signal’ today? Well, Jordan argued that the 600 people being prosecuted for the Jan 6 Insurrection are being investigated by the executive branch. That’s where investigations should be.
On October 10, 2020 there was a ‘Patriot Muster’ rally put on by a group called United American Defense Force. The rally was in Denver, CO. The UADF was led by a former Benghazi security contractor named John Tiegen. You’re gonna wanna read this one.🧵👇🏻
You may recall during 2020 there were many protests. The George Floyd protests took place over the summer. Armed men dressed in battle fatigues were patrolling gas stations in Kentucky. Armed men dressed in battle fatigues stormed various State Houses.
As a matter of fact 2020 was so nuts, just 2 days before the UADF’s Patriot Muster in Colorado, the FBI released a statement about a plot to kidnap The Governor of Michigan. Crazy, right? Like, super nuts.
Wow…have you read the testimony of Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen? The link is below. The thread attempts to provide context and highlights what I found to be of some importance. Wow…just…wow. 🧵👇🏻 judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…
Chuck Grassley, the Senate Pro Tempore who was poised to step in if Pence didn’t certify the election as per Point 1 in the Eastman Memo, defense of trump is that trump ‘listened to his advisors and didn’t replace Rosen with Clark for not sending the Clark letter so no harm.’📌1
While true-ish it also completely negates the fact that there *was* a Clark letter to begin with. Yes, there was a meeting in the Oval in which 6 of the 7 lawyers present thought the Jeffrey Clark scheme was a bad one. The 7th lawyer was Clark.
The Subverting Justice report released by the Senate Judiciary Committee shows a scheme by former president trump to use the Department of Justice 🗣 to OVERTURN THE 2020 ELECTION. It reveals a lot more than that if we care to look. Here is a wee meaningless thread🧵👇🏻
Some may argue the first impeachment of trump for his quid pro quo with Ukraine on a not perfect phone call was meaningless because the Senate had no intention of convicting their golden goose that laid federal judges and tax breaks for donors.
Some may say that impeaching trump for a second time for inciting an Insurrection was meaningless. He was out of office during the Senate trial. Ted Cruz, a sitting juror in the impeachment, was seen providing aid to trump’s lawyers. It was a sham.
We absolutely cannot allow the media to do to this Senate Judiciary Committee Report on trump’s Pressuring the DOJ to OVERTURN THE ELECTION, what they did to the Mueller report and Volume 5. These things are all connected and the context matters. 🧵👇🏻
The pieces are coming together. Jeffrey Bossert Clark (not in a position of leadership at DOJ) was making a proposal to the President of the United States, without the knowledge of his bosses, to send a letter to ‘relevant’ states 🗣to aid him in OVERTURNING THE ELECTION!!
The letter was not signed by then Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen so it was never sent to the states. The scheme was for the DOJ to tell the states they thought there were irregularities that should be reviewed. Just because they felt like there might have been fraud.
Sen Kyrsten Sinema’s objectively hypocritical approach seems very Republicany. Why? When she was shoulder to shoulder with John Cornyn, I began to worry she was a plant so I took a wee look.
Sinema was the lead sponsor of a bill called S1967, the “Childcare Expansion for Military Families Act of 2021”. Her bill provides construction of child development centers. But she won’t support the Build Back Better Act which provides universal pre-k and other child provisions?
Sec 3 of Sinema’s Bill reads: ‘Education and Infant And Early Childhood Mental Health Consultation Services for Infant and Early Childhood Mental Health’, but she doesn’t support the Build Back Better Act that would expand healthcare to children?