So @McAdooGordon has asked about the timing of contract w/ GA Tech, etc. Here's from my Right to Know Requests that provide some of the timing.
2/
3/
4/
/5
5/
/6
6/
7/
8/ And I think this is the one @McAdooGordon re timing of billing.

• • •

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

Feb 17
BREAKING: Michael Sussmann's attorneys file Motion to Dismiss. Image
2/ This was to be expected. More later as about to do a hit on election integrity.
3/ Just finished quick read, lawsplainer will be forthcoming but in short: This motion seeks dismissal by arguing the facts alleged in the indictment EVEN IF TRUE do not state a crime. In other words, Sussmann did not commit a crime by lying to FBI 's Baker.
Read 9 tweets
Feb 15
OMgosh: "What merits coverage?" Compare Mueller Special Counsel with Durham re coverage.
2/ LOL: "Old news." Yup, just as I said: Sussmann-friendly folks fed a cleaned up version of the story the same "journalist" who wrote this clean up piece, back in September to get a head of the news. So now it is "old news."
3/ Of course, I only realized that after Durham's filing hit and we doing some research and came across Savage's previous pro bono defense work.
Read 29 tweets
Feb 15
THREADETEE: PSA As Sussmann-friendly media tries to tell you that Durham's Friday motion was a nothingburger, you need only read @FDRLST detailed analysis of the filing, which Sussmann's legal team impliedly acquiesed in its correctness. 1/
2/ Article 1: The Explosive New (no, not that explosion). thefederalist.com/2022/02/14/spe…
3/ And some other significant points (with some interesting triffles). thefederalist.com/2022/02/14/8-m…
Read 4 tweets
Feb 15
THREAD BREAKING: Sussmann's attorney's aren't happy with Durham. Filed today.
2/ Just posting pages here and then will comment:
3/ continued:
Read 13 tweets
Feb 15
THREAD. One of my followers asked me about this noting it seemed reasonable. It does seem reasonable but other than making a couple correct points is wacked. Yes, there was no "hacking" in what we consider hacking, at least not that we know of yet. And yes Joffe had access 1/
2/ to data. But that's where the reasonableness ends. The govt' has access to alot of things & that doesn't mean they can use it for whatever. And Joffee having legal access to that data also didn't give him the right to do whatever. And we KNOW Joffe's maintainance w/ servers
3/ wasn't for him to try to connect Russia phones to Trump b/c if it was then his company would be the one meeting with the CIA and not his personal lawyer to pass on the "intel."
Read 8 tweets
Feb 14
@CBCNews Freedom has been a rally cry for centuries:
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!

:(