Both, and more.

This happens to be what I wrote about this week on my blog.

What is the point of all of these (losing) lawsuits and challenges?

My conclusion: It's not so much about delay as it is about undermining the legitimacy of government.

1/
It seems to me that these filings serve multiple purposes for Trump, including:

They keep his base fired up, they help with fundraising, and they show that he’s a “fighter.”

They help seed right-wing talking points.

2/
The "fighter" mentality:

When Nixon resigned, people like Manafort and Stone were frustrated and angry. They wanted Nixon to keep fighting.

They thought he was driven from office by a biased liberal media.

Well, now they have their own media.

3/
An example of the "fight, fight, fight" mentality⤵️

A common claim in Trump's lawsuits is the claim that whatever branch of government is investigating him is illegitimate and illegal and is targeting him for political reasons.

4/
It doesn't matter that he loses. He lost the election fraud lawsuits, but that didn't change the minds of those who believed there was fraud.

Repeating the lies persuades people that they are true. See:
ajc.com/politics/elect…

5/
Trump's role in the right-wing ecosystem is that he signals the lies that they're all supposed to repeat.

The (losing) lawsuits signal the lie. They seed the right wing talking points.

6/
Also it helps with fundraising.

What we are seeing is a foreshadowing of the legal "defense" he will use later.

His defenses will be:
🔹government prosecuting him is illegal and illegitimate and
🔹he's a victim of political prosecution.

7/
Notice that losing in court won't actually undermine these talking points.

If the court and prosecutors are conducting a partisan witch hunt (and if the jurors are all angry radical leftist Democrats) conviction will prove his point.

8/
The lie that the government investigating him is illegitimate is similar to the big lie that he lost the election:

Both of these lies seek to undermine and delegitimize a democratic government.

It accomplishes what the insurrection accomplished, without as much blood.

9/

• • •

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

Keep Current with Teri Kanefield

Teri Kanefield 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 @Teri_Kanefield

2 Jan
This is precisely the confusion people have.

Yes, this was reported from an anonymous source in the press. Anonymous sources reported in the press is not admissible evidence in court.

(Talking about the reporting that Trump watched the coverage of the insurrection on T.V.)

1/
To bring charges (or convict) prosecutors need evidence that is admissible in court.

Of course, the committee is not a law enforcement body and can't bring charges, but they've said they are coordinating with other agencies to avoid duplication of effort.

Anyway . . .

2/
People see reporting in the newspaper and say, "See there is evidence! Why haven't these people been charged yet!"

Or, "ho, hum, I read about that in the newspaper, so I know he's guilty, so what the heck is taking so long?"

3/
Read 13 tweets
1 Jan
The full DOJ statement is here: justice.gov/usao-dc/one-ye…

It's worth reading.

Also, no, Garland is not going to do what Comey did in 2016 and talk about ongoing investigations.
"The Department of Justice’s resolve to hold accountable those who committed crimes on Jan. 6, 2021, has not, and will not, wane."
justice.gov/usao-dc/one-ye…

It's what Garland has been saying since last March.

It's the most you'll get because the DOJ is run by rule-of-law people.
And people got so used to Trump telling the DOJ what to do, that they think Biden should do the same.

A pillar of democracy is prosecutorial independence.

Read 4 tweets
30 Dec 21
It seems to me that these filings serve multiple purposes for Trump:

🔹They keep his base fired up
🔹They help with fundraising
🔹They show that he's a "fighter"
🔹They help seed right-wing talking points
I'm arguing against the Twitter Talking Point that these are primarily delay tactics.

These cases are going very quickly and are not holding up the committee.

People said the same thing about the election lawsuits, which delayed nothing.

The truth is much more nuanced.

If everyone shouts "DELAY TACTICS" each time Trump files something in court, people miss much of what's happening.

The election lawsuits did not create any delays, but they served their purposes.
Read 18 tweets
30 Dec 21
The January 6 committee filed its response to Trump's request that the Supreme Court hear his executive privilege case.

supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/2…

To compare, here's what Trump filed: supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/2…

(No surprise: The committee's brief is written and argued well.)

1/
Here is how Trump's brief presented the issue ⤵️

His argument is that the select committee's request was unconstitutional, therefore, he should have gotten a preliminary injunction. He wants the Court to decide whether the request was constitutional.

Here's the problem . . .
2/
To get a preliminary injunction, Trump had to show with clear evidence each of these four criteria⤵️

The likelihood of succeeding on the merits is only one element.

So far, there has not actually been a trial on the merits of whether the request was Constitutional.

3/
Read 10 tweets
30 Dec 21
Trump filed a supplemental brief with the Supreme Court (in his executive privilege case) arguing that the committee is considering criminal referrals, therefore, the request for documents exceeds Congress's legislative powers.

1/

supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/2…
His argument is that Congress does not (and should not) have a law enforcement function.

Central to his argument is that the committee is illegal and illegitimate and so the subpoenas are unenforceable.

Here is the article he quotes: washingtonpost.com/politics/janua…

2/
Given the fact that the committee is studying a crime to find out what legislation can prevent future crimes, it's hard to say that they shouldn't make criminal referrals where appropriate.

Trump's argument comes down to "they're picking on me!"

3/
Read 14 tweets
29 Dec 21
I think what @TimothyDSnyder is trying to say is that Tweeting isn't political activism. Even really really mean rage Tweeting doesn't actually count.

"Too much screen time makes us vulnerable to bad politics," he says.

Idea: Find out how to help administer the 2022 election.
Not long ago, Steve Bannon horrified (and terrified) people when we learned he was trying to move Trump-Coup supporters into positions administering elections.

#2 on my list is "get involved with local elections."

terikanefield.com/things-to-do/
Yes. @TimothyDSnyder talks about the pandemic and suggests that it isn't a coincidence that the coup in 2020 came after people cooped up inside.

I worked the past several elections as a volunteer lawyer and worked a polling place during the CA recall. . .
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

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(