In John Eastman's application for TRO fighting the Jan6 committee's subpoena, he argued that (1) the committee lacked authority to issue the subpoena, and that the subpoena violated his 1st and 4th Amendment rights.
As expected, he lost.
1/
politico.com/f/?id=0000017e…
As expected, he lost.
1/
politico.com/f/?id=0000017e…
Now Eastman is supposed to work on a privilege log, presumably because he's claiming attorney-client privilege over some of the documents.
He also raised a 5th Amendment argument, but claiming the 5th wouldn't prevent him from working with the committee.
2/
He also raised a 5th Amendment argument, but claiming the 5th wouldn't prevent him from working with the committee.
2/
Temporary restraining order.
(I typed it out, but Twitter told me I had too many characters!)
This ruling matters because courts are rejecting the claim that this committee is illegitimate. . .
3/
(I typed it out, but Twitter told me I had too many characters!)
This ruling matters because courts are rejecting the claim that this committee is illegitimate. . .
https://twitter.com/elby1/status/1485830971689779202
3/
It's clear already that "the committee is illegitimate" will be a right-wing talking point going forward.
These court rulings should make it harder for them to shout about how the committee is illegitimate -- but when have they ever cared about facts?
4/
These court rulings should make it harder for them to shout about how the committee is illegitimate -- but when have they ever cared about facts?
4/
And obviously the ruling also matters because the courts are not going to help Trump and pals evade this committee.
5/
5/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
