Flynn claims that the committee has been "rushing" to refer non-cooperative witnesses for publication.
I know some people on this site who would take issue with the "rushing" part 😆
I believe this is what it feels like to witnesses like Flynn: a relentless pursuit.
Flynn seems genuinely afraid that any information he provides will lead to a criminal probe.
The problem he has is this: Refusing to testify won't stop that from happening.
I'm sensing some panic on his part.
His First Amendment argument is that he genuinely believed the election had been stolen through fraud and the committee seeks to punish him for these beliefs.
The committee's view is that the election fraud lies prompted the insurrection.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There is a Twitter consensus that the purpose of all these lawsuits (like the one Flynn filed seeking an injunction against the select committee) is to "run out the clock."
This makes no sense because the clock runs until at least 2024 and the cases are moving quickly.
1/
The work of the committee will be done in 2022 but the select committee is a truth-finding panel. The prosecutors have until at least 2024.
People similarly said that the election fraud lawsuits were to “run out the clock.”
Those cases also went fast.
2/
The election fraud cases were to feed the right-wing propaganda network.
Trump and pals also lost 60 of the 61 election fraud lawsuits (and the "win" was a minor one that didn't help much.)
3/
Looks like Trump is suing Letitia James because he doesn't want to give a deposition under oath.
I'm reading it now.
Oh goodness. This will not break his losing streak. He needs a preliminary injunction and that isn't going to happen. documentcloud.org/documents/2116…
1/
To paraphrase his argument: Letitia James is a Democrat and she doesn't like me so her investigation is politically motivated and therefore unfair and the court needs to make her stop.
I wish I was exaggerating.
Oy.
2/
And what law is she violating?
Count 1: Trump alleges that she is violating his civil rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42…
Alleging a 14th Amendment violation takes some real chutzpa.
3/
Basically, the text says that the Electoral Count Act was unconstitutional, so it should be disregarded.
Among the problems is this: You can't change the rules by which the election results are tabulated after the counting of the votes. You can't change the rules after the game.
"I know I have cookie crumbs on my face, but I swear I wasn't the one who took the cookie."
(Although my expectations for these guys are so low I'm actually glad he isn't already digging in and saying there was nothing wrong with the text.)
Mark Meadows willingly turned these messages over to the select committee, but then, enraged, put the brakes on his cooperation when the committee wanted his private phone records.
It seems to me (and this is a guess, I've never done an investigation like this—my work was criminal defense)
the committee is releasing these to put pressure on the holdouts. It's like saying, "We know what's going on so you may as well come clean."