Karen Fann is the AZ State Senate President. Rudy Giuliani is overseeing the effort to seat false electors. Christina Bobb is a reporter for OAN. Why did Rudy ask Bobb to forward declarations to Fann?🧵👇🏻
In essence, these ‘declarations’ were the statements of people who had thought they were witnessing ‘rampant voter fraud’ as one person put it. Here is the email from OAN reporter, I mean JAG officer, I mean CEO of Voices and Votes, I mean Rudy team member Bobb.
“Mayor Giuliani asked me.” 👆🏻👀👆🏻
And here, I thought the reporters were supposed to be asking the questions. Questions to Karen Fann like:
“At what point did you become aware of a plot to seat alternate electors?”
Because it looks like General Counsel informed Fann that AZ would have to change the laws for such a thing to occur and even if they did, those changes couldn’t be applied to the 2020 election. Fann knew this 12 days prior to the 14th. What did she know and when?
Another question a reporter might have asked was:
“Did you ask Rudy Giuliani to file a lawsuit so the judge could put a hold on the certification until [AZ] could get answers”?
And to bring it back around to Bobb, the declarations she sent was the ‘evidence’ Rudy would have used in the lawsuit Fann asked him to file.
If Tim Russert were alive, his whiteboard would read:
Arizona
Arizona
Arizona
The one exception to that was the testimony of Chanel Rion re: her colleague and CEO of Voices and Votes from her deposition in the Coomer v trump et al defamation case which can be found here.
The State Senate President of AZ Karen Fann sending donors help pay for the fraudit to Voices and Votes which if you remember from just a few tweets ago is led by OAN reporter Christina Bobb. Cool. Cool.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We are in the Both Sides Era. For what seems the past decade, we have been subjected to both sides of the news, normalizing the weird, accepting the inappropriate, and moving on from the unforgivable.
Both sides are not the same.
A wee Sunday morning coffee🧵👇🏻
We have been so conditioned to Both Sides everything that we immediately fall into one side or the other. We are sorting ourselves based on memes and shallow thinking. Reporters complaining about hotel experiences due to the DNC running late, isn’t news. That’s a yelp review.
Have you noticed trump is on both sides of every issue? Probably not, because the “press hasn’t yet learned how to report on trump.” Why is covering trump any different from what they learned in journalism school?
Why not ask him about his incongruities? Or a follow up question?
Did you ever hear the phrase: “they have so much money they don’t know what to do with it.”? Not a problem, I’ve ever run into myself, but Project 2025 is just that. Billionaires want to be bankers. They want to sell off our governmental oversight to private companies they own.
Here is Project 2025. There isn’t one part of our lives this won’t touch. Think it doesn’t mean you? There is no provision to exclude from its effects those who vote for fascism so choose your candidate wisely.
Here is the part where they will abolish the federal reserve. It will be replaced by currency they can “create” and then lend out at their own interest rates.
“There is no place for political violence” has been a pretty common refrain throughout the weekend. It really got me thinking. ”Political violence” must be one of those “you know it when you see it” types of things.
Let’s see…
🧵👇🏻
Political violence strikes me as a visual medium but there are so many things that occur before we see the blood that I think might be political violence. Are we just numb to it? How do we define what is political violence and what is just violence? Why is it different?
Are Texas Gov Greg Abbott’s razor balls floating in the river, considered “political violence”? Kind of. I mean, the idea is people from south of the US shouldn’t be allowed to come here and take our jobs.
Political.
To deter from this, razor balls in the river.
Violence.
There’s been a lot said about Joe Biden since the debate. I, along with so many of you, watched it play out in real time as respected news transmitters read out ‘inside texts’ from knee jerk reactionaries.
After much thought, I won’t be voting for Joe Biden because he’s old.
🧵👇🏻
I’ll be voting for Joe Biden because he’s team democracy. I’m voting for ideas he represents. I’m voting for the team of people he can put together. I’m voting for my own interests and for your ability to vote for your own interests. I didn’t vote for him last time either, btw.
In 2020, I voted for a November 5th, 2024 election. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were the only options on the ballot that allowed this. I colored in Joe and Kamala’s bubble to keep the lights on long enough for us to have this election. Like many of you, I voted team democracy.
I am loathe to do predictions. However, there are some things you just can’t help but see coming. Project 2025 is a blinking red alarm and we all need to be aware of the stakes of this election. Please familiarize yourself with EO11246, be discriminating voters.
A wee thread🧵👇🏻
On September 24th, 1965 President Lyndon Johnson signed Executive Order 11246. EO11246 established Equal Opportunity Employment. It includes Non-Discrimination in Government. It includes Non-Discrimination Employment by Government Contractors and Subcontractors.
Focus on Non-Discrimination Employment by Government Contractors and Subcontractors. In Sub Part B under Contractor’s Agreements, contractors agree to not discriminate against employees based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Trust me…
🧵👇🏻
The above is the oath the President takes at 12 noon on January 20. Typically, it is administered by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court but there is no law that makes that a requirement. You could have your gran do it. So why is it *usually* the Chief Justice?
For this thread let’s assume the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is there as a symbol of the law. Chief Justice Roberts in a way represents the Judicial Branch of our government on the day it grants power to the person who will symbolize the Executive Branch.