Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Feb 15, 2022 13 tweets 5 min read Read on X
THREAD BREAKING: Sussmann's attorney's aren't happy with Durham. Filed today.
2/ Just posting pages here and then will comment:
3/ continued:
4/ Now this is interesting. So if none of the data was after Trump was president, why was it provided to show Trump was using a Russian phone? Because Trump was at the Executive Office? This footnote makes no sense.
5/ Oh, poor Sussmann. You spread lies about Trump for 5 years and now Trump exposes you...🎻🎻
6/ I don't think this tack, however, is the wisest...."Oh, we didn't charge you with conspiracy, did we..."
7/ OMgosh...so the campaign is claiming Sussmann did not go to FBI on behalf of Hillary Clinton campaign. Now, this is getting good.
8/ It wouldn't surprise me if the court is inclined to grant the motion and caution Durham not to file additional detail. Although the Durham will have a chance to respond to the Motion to Strike, which should be interesting.
9/9 The biggest take-away, however is this: The press has starting covering this in a way it hasn't before and that is huge! Sussmann's chronies had no issue leaking to the NYT in September re the EOP, but now that they can't control the narrative, Shut. It. Down.
Post-Twit: I must admit I'm bummed they didn't single out my two articles in their motion, but then again, they were so solid & devasting they likely didn't want to bring any more attention to them.
Post-Twit 2: Also, from strategy angle, this wasn't wise b/c now the press is going to cover it MORE. Had Sussmann stayed silent, it would have likely died down in a day. UNLESS he succeeds in getting court to tell Durham to cut it out.
Post-Twit 3: Okay I should have just waited until I knew I was done. From the indictment. So here's Sussmann's defense. Sussmann's attorne to Clinton Campaign Person: Did you tell Sussmann to go to FBI w/ this info.
Answer: No. Closing: "He may have defrauded the campaign
PT4: but he didn't lie to Baker.
Durham's Cross: Did you authorize Sussmann to go to the press with this story? Did you authorize Sussman to do X, Y, Z. This defense is going to open up a huge can of worms for Clinton Campaign!

• • •

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

Keep Current with Margot Cleveland

Margot Cleveland 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 @ProfMJCleveland

Jul 3
Liz Murrill is Rep. AG in LA. After she pointed out New Orleans officials were violating state criminal law, local officials indicted her & set $400,000 bail bond. Yet another example of big city Dems in red state using rigged grand jury system to target Republicans. 1/
2/  Fortunately, the Louisiana Supreme Court stepped in to stop this farce.  It took them less than 24 hours. Image
3/ Image
Image
Image
Read 4 tweets
Jul 2
Small town America for the win!
Image
Image
Read 4 tweets
Jun 25
Alito throws some subtle shade to the lawfare in the Temporary Protective Status case. Image
2/ That "Nevertheless, lower courts," sentence has herculean restraint! Image
3/ Reminder: The lower courts didn't give a dang! Image
Read 4 tweets
May 26
THREADETTE: SCOTUS issued opinion today in case where group representing immigration judges sought to challenge in federal court rule that they had to get a supervisor's approval before speaking re immigration issues. 1/
2/ The full opinion (which is short) and Justice Thomas's concurrence are must-reads because IMNSHO they are SCOTUS first group slap to rouge judges. supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf…
3/ Full court signed on to this line: Image
Read 7 tweets
May 5
🔥Pending before SCOTUS right now is petition for cert in what is one of most consequential constitutional cases related to liberty in the form of a free-market. And yet, few have taken notice of the case. In short, EPA decided who to give market share to based on "equity." 1/ Image
2/ Article here by colleague at @NCLAlegal washingtontimes.com/news/2026/may/…
@NCLAlegal 3/3 Here is the docket for those interested. It is truly appalling unelected bureaucrats are deciding whose business to kill--including taking their market share to give to so-called disadvantaged folks who never built business w/ sweat equity.
Read 4 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!

:(