Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
@McAdooGordon
Mar 5, 2022 • 22 tweets • 5 min read • Read on X
Update on Jan6 Defendant Being Held Illegally. 3/5/22

@shipwreckedcrew filed another motion:
"DEFENDANT LUCAS DENNEY’S EMERGENCY MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FROM CUSTODY" asserting a violation of the statutory requirement to indict in 30 days that I explained./1
He lays out the statutes, 18 USC 1361 & 1362, and applies them to Denney's facts: he was arrested on Dec 13, 2021 & is still not indicted yet as of today, March 5, 2022 - 82 days later. So case MUST be dismissed.

Link to filing here: drive.google.com/file/d/1b4tyRV…

/2
Before folks say, I agree his math on the 30 days (or 40 if 10 days are excluded for "reasonable" time for transport from TX to DC) is wrong. Looks like he went from the date of the detention hearing instead of arrest. He filed an errata to fix it. Link
drive.google.com/file/d/128tE3F… /3
Ship asks to postpone figuring out whether the case is going to be dismissed with or w/out prejudice in favor of releasing Denney right now & dealing with the legal niceties later. Unusual approach, but it's also unusual to not get indicted w/in the statutory requirement./4
"Mr. Denney urges this Court to Order the immediate dismissal of this matter, and his release from custody FORTHWITH.
Dismissal is mandatory. Whether that dismissal is to be entered with or without prejudice is a matter that can be reserved for another day." /5
"The matter of Mr. Lucas’s liberty cannot and should not wait for another day."

100% correct. Being detained illegally is anathema to our American principles.

/6
"The Government is in violation of § 3161(b). The remedy is not a matter of discretion and there is no “cure” the Government can seek to apply. The complaint must be dismissed.
See, United States v. Hinch, 308 F.Supp.2nd,599, 602 (D.Md. 2004)."

/7
Basically, that's legal lingo for "They got nothing to say."

Nice conclusion:

"Each day Mr. Denney remains in custodial detention is an additional day that his liberty rights are denied without due process in violation his rights under The Fifth Amendment. . . ."

/8
"Mr. Denney should not be made sit in a jail cell even a single day longer while the Government tries to explain away its failure to comply with the law."

Pleading is short, sweet, & to the point: Denney MUST be released & the case dismissed.

/9
Ship filed this as an emergency motion. Not sure what the court will do, if anything, between now & Monday to be honest tho. In theory a judge is available at all times. Still hard to get heard as a practical matter on weekends. An illegal detention certainly warrants the ask./10
The magistrate who's already hearing the case on Monday will have gotten the pleading too, however, & could order an immediate phone hearing perhaps. I once had a judge issue an order for the parties to draft & file a pleading by a 4 hour deadline on a Sunday during a trial. /11
Making the absence-of-an-indictment argument definitely turns up the heat, & as I told you guys on Thursday & Ship tells the court in this pleading, there is no way for the govt to do anything to fix it at this point. The dismissal is require. /12
That doesn't mean the Govt can't re-charge him, IF the court dismisses w/o prejudice but it does mean he'll be released & he will get credit for the time that he was detained for all purposes if he is re-arrested. Plus, it's a bad look if the Govt tries to detain him again. /13
Once Denney is released, it needs to be seriously looked at as to how this happened. Ship should ask the court to make a referral to the Marshall's service at least to explain the absurd 46 day transport. I may write some letters to various offices about it. It's outrageous. /14
If you started with this thread and you want to go back to where the whole thing started last week, here's the link of where to start:

Update Morning of March 7

A new order popped up on the docket this morning. It is dated March 5 (Friday), but it was not on the docket last night when I looked at it last & that was late.
The DC magistrate is now apparently engaged. 😃He ordered the Defendant to appear IN PERSON. (These hearings are being held virtually these days.) That's a good sign that the release is coming.
He also ordered: "The Court further ORDERS the United States to prepare to explain the delay in scheduling the Defendants appearance after his arrival to the District on or about January 31, 2022."

Someone's got some 'splaining to do.
I don't think the courts are going to like the answers that they are going to get (if the prosecutors are honest about what happened, which so far they haven't really been.)
"Well, judge, we thought we could just schedule a second "Initial Appearance" and just start the whole constitutional timelines thing running again."

The Judge:
Per @shipwreckedcrew, the defendant, Denney, is not at a very nearby facility. He's at one a few hours away. I wonder if the magistrate knows that. It will be interesting to see if he actually appears in person.
Further thread on what happened at the hearing on March 7, 2022.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸

Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 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 @McAdooGordon

Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Aug 25
The EO banning no cash bail in DC may be legal but doesn’t address the real problem.

DC law permits judges to detain anyone who’s violent/a risk to others or a flight risk. No cash bail is only for people who aren’t. The problem is w/juveniles, not adults getting no cash bail.
And the EO may not be legal actually either. I’d need to go back and look at the authorities closely.

But the fact that the feds have power over DC doesn’t necessarily mean the federal executive branch can do whatever it wants.

Congress has the constitutional power over DC.
Congress definitely has the power to override any DC law. In fact, DC laws don’t go into effect until the Congress either exercises its right to amend them or passes on that.

So, I’m not sure that the POTUS has the authority to override a law that Congress has approved.
Read 4 tweets
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Jul 24
There once was a General named Clapper,
By trade a clandestine wiretapper,
But he joined the Steele Hoax,
Now his rep is a joke,
And his life is going down the crapper.
There once was a G-man named Comey,
Who didn’t see Steele was a phony,
He said: “Hilary is Ok!,
It’s the Donald who must pay!”
Cause he couldn’t tell shit from baloney.
There once was a lawyer named Page,
Who was lovely but not very sage,
Her texts to her man,
Only helped get him canned,
As they wallowed in impotent rage.
Read 16 tweets
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Jul 20
Boiled down:

Hoaxers: “Trump, you can’t be POTUS even tho you just somehow won the election. No, no, no.”

DJT: “Hahahaha. Watch me. Losers!”

Hoaxers:
Hoaxers then proceed to do a whole bunch of things to try to make actual reality -in which DJT is POTUS- match up to their “reality” in which he can’t be.

That’s was IMPOSSIBLE to achieve in Fall & Winter 2016-2017.

But they tried anyway.

It’s a non-rational conspiracy.
Non-rational conspiracy is rare. It’s usually confined to a very small number of people because it’s based on actual mental illness & a few other factors, like coercion &/or psychological pressure. Think Manson Family.

But it can be based on group psychoses or shared psychological stress rather than outright mental illness. Large suicide pacts are an extreme example, like the Jim Jones incident. John Brown’s raid could be seen in this light too. And perhaps the Gunpowder Plot in Britain.
Read 6 tweets
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Jul 16
Supreme Court picks - age analysis

I thought I'd take a look & see what I think about whether DJT in his current term and/or JD Vance (assuming he takes it next) or whoever might next be POTUS after DJT will have many SCOTUS picks.

Here's how it shapes up - just based on age.
The "average" age that a Justice retires (either from a voluntary retirement or a death) is about 78/79, but that's based on historical data and the Justices in modern times retire at later ages for a number of reasons.

So, I looked at the actual last ten Justices to retire and/or die (which yielded two slightly different groups as 2 have retired but not yet died so there's no # for their death age to use.)
If you average the ages of the last 10 retirement ages, you get 82.3 years of age, & if you average the last 10 death ages (many of which are after retirement), you get 87.9 years of age. So, taking that range, how many years before the current Justices likely leave the Court, one way or the other?
Read 7 tweets
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Jul 16
Excellent reporting by @ProfMJCleveland about how the DC federal judges are not impartial when it comes to DJT/his administration, much less giving them the deference due the duly elected co-equal branch of govt - & admitted to CJ Roberts at the judicial conference this Spring.👇🏻
I remain of the view that ALL judges who were in the DC federal courthouse on J6 were in fact affected by that event & it is impossible for them to be impartial in such cases as they are required to be by law. This was outrageously evident when a bunch attended DJT’s arraignment.
I would extend that to any judge in that courthouse who handled a J6 case. They are hopelessly tainted by those cases.

They should all recuse themselves or Congress should legislate that any judge in those 2 groups is barred from handling any case involving the administration.
Read 4 tweets
Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Jul 8
So you understand:

1. No tax money goes to Planned Parenthood for abortions directly. That has been prohibited by law for many years.

2. Congress does not “fund” Planned Parenthood directly for the other services it provides either.

3. Rather, Planned Parenthood receives Medicaid payments for non-abortion services rendered to people who are on Medicaid, just like other medical care providers.

4. Planned Parenthood in addition to abortions provides the following services:

birth control, STD testing and treatment, pregnancy testing and options counseling, emergency contraception, “gender-affirming” care, Pap tests, breast exams, and vaccinations.

5. The “funding” cut off by the OBBB are these payments thru Medicaid.

So the issue in the litigation is going to be whether Congress can constitutionally cut Planned Parenthood out of the Medicaid Program in the way that the OBBB does it.
The same kind of problem would arise if a different Congress passed a law saying religious medical providers who are in the Medicaid program could not receive Medicaid payments for medical services they provide because they also provide religious instruction or counseling to their patients.
Medicaid is an entitlement program created by the Congress. The payments it makes are not like grants or other forms of federal funding, which the Congress controls directly.

When Congress spends money on something that is available to the public generally as an entitlement, you run into the questions of whether it can then cut some people out, which can turn on the reason for the cut, because the Constitution prevents the Congress from making laws that violate certain rights, including religion and viewpoint.

So there’s a genuine issue in this Planned Parenthood case. But it requires a lot more analysis than the Mass. district judge has given it.
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!

Send Email!

:(