Sarah Posner Profile picture
Oct 31, 2021 13 tweets 4 min read Read on X
New @washingtonpost investigation:

"Trump was the driving force at every turn as he orchestrated what would become an attempted political coup in the months leading up to Jan. 6, calling his supporters to Washington, encouraging the mob ..."

washingtonpost.com/politics/inter…
"At the Pentagon, leaders had acute fears about widespread violence, and some feared Trump could misuse the National Guard to remain in power, new accounts reveal."

washingtonpost.com/politics/inter…
Reading this new reporting, and it's a miracle there wasn't a mass casualty event.
Planning for this eventually must now become routine. Sadly.
16 days before Jan. 6, "The chatter about bringing guns to D.C., in particular, was off the charts."

washingtonpost.com/politics/inter…
Acting Defense Secretary: "I thought the demonstrators were going to try to bait us into a Boston Massacre-type situation."

washingtonpost.com/politics/inter…
I think the FBI needs a refresher course on the First Amendment.
Come the fuck on

• • •

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

Keep Current with Sarah Posner

Sarah Posner 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 @sarahposner

Dec 5, 2022
This is not true. She filed the lawsuit before she made any wedding websites.
She was not taken to court. She filed the lawsuit to get exempted from complying with a non discrimination law. But the religious right loves to have the image of the Christian proprietor being hauled into court for her beliefs. But it’s simply not true.
ADF knows this — they represent her — but they retweeted Graham anyway.
Read 4 tweets
Dec 5, 2022
Read more about the lawyers representing the web designer in 303 Creative:

thenation.com/article/archiv…
Read 4 tweets
Dec 5, 2022
I finally read this piece today and it is so misinformed on facts, law, reality, history that I am shocked that it ran, even as "opinion."
To wit: the opening anecdote suggests that her church or her kids' Christian school might lose their tax exempt status because of their stance opposing marriage equality. 2/x
First, this has not happened once in the 7 yrs since Obergefell.
Second, despite all the fear sowed by the right that this would be like Bob Jones, recall that even though SCOTUS ruled in the govt's favor, the IRS abandoned enforcing that policy, and... 3/x
Read 26 tweets
Nov 19, 2022
I’d been on an airplane.

I just read the piece. I have some thoughts, which I will collect.
So. I know Rob, and he has been a source on a few stories I’ve written.

I understand how shocking this particular story — along with a couple of others recently, in which he describes his efforts to shape how SCOTUS justices thought about and wrote decisions. 1/x
Plus the efforts to connect SCOTUS justices with his stealth missionaries who would help shape their views. 2/x
Read 20 tweets
Nov 14, 2022
I just read the New York Times piece raising doubts about gender-affirming care (although the article doesn't call it that). This graf shows just how unaware the writers and editors are of the political/religious movement behind the effort to deny trans people their rights:
(Here's the link to the full piece: nytimes.com/2022/11/14/hea…)
I've been covering the religious right assault on trans rights for years. It's driven not by science or medicine, but by political activists who sought to sow a panic about trans people, a tactic that gained steam after SCOTUS ruled for marriage equality in 2015.
Read 14 tweets
Oct 25, 2022
I read NYT story this morning and tried (unsuccessfully) to dissect the sourcing. This is illuminating (and infuriating that NYT elides or obscures this)

Two Witnesses the DoJ Wants to See Cooperating Share One Thing. And That’s a Problem., by @nycjayjay open.substack.com/pub/statuskuo/… Image
@emptywheel It's not ok to obscure the identity or interests of your sources to such a degree that readers have no idea that someone with multiple conflicts and motivation is main or only source for your story that is basically non-news but shapes the narrative
Read 6 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(