J.E. Dyer Profile picture
Mar 22 7 tweets 2 min read
Short thread on Barr & "election interference."
The strange thing here is that Barr is saying some ppl's failure to tell the truth about the laptop was election interference.
Yet - pay close attention - the only actor that might conceivably be accused of interference was... 1/7
...the FBI. The FBI knew something it wasn't telling anyone, b/c it had had the laptop since Dec 2019.
And - here's the "pay attention" part - Barr said over the wknd that the FBI did its job by making a statement about that.
Yet the FBI *DIDN'T* say anything illuminating...2/7
...about the laptop in its statement. All it did was say it had nothing to add to DNI Ratcliffe's statement.
So Barr basically covered for the FBI stonewall.
I outlined yesterday why there was only one thing the FBI would say about the laptop, & that was...3/7
..."Yes, we have it, but we can't talk about it."
Yet they DID NOT say that. Now Barr has just left the impression they did as much as could be expected - even though they DIDN'T.
No one else who spoke about the laptop at the time could realistically be accused of...4/7
...election interference. It's sad but true that merely lying about something like that isn't election interference. It's politics. It's trying to play down or hide damaging info in order to get elected. It's been done in every election since the beginning of time.
5/7
So the real question here is why Bill Barr is now retailing an "election interference" theme he must know is a non-starter - other than to raise questions about Joe Biden (who he also says was "interfering" in his own election by lying to avert bad press).
6/7
Candidates & their supporters lie all the time. Retroactively turning that into "election interference" has some motive.
Looks to me like accelerating a drumbeat to get Biden out of office.
Let's be careful what bandwagons we jump on. 7/7

• • •

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

Keep Current with J.E. Dyer

J.E. Dyer 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 @OptimisticCon

Mar 21
This is what a lot of ppl are arguing over & it's a good moment for reflection.
"The media, intelligence community and DNC all lied in order to alter the outcome of an election."
Jeff C says exactly the right thing: we can't trust them now.
He does NOT say the wrong thing... 1/14
...which would be that there's anyone to prosecute or any statutory crime here.
Two of the groups actually get to lie to alter the outcome of an election, & do it all the time. (Media & DNC.)
3rd group, intel comm, can lie as private citizens (what they did re laptop)...2/14
...and in any case, proving *in court* that they lied w/"Russian disinfo" statement is not something a prosecutor would even attempt.
Even if they were using access to natl intel to lie to the public, this is a case of *absence* of supporting intel data - NOT... 3/14
Read 14 tweets
Mar 20
This is going to be really unpopular, & it's no excuse about the evident corruption at FBI & DOJ.
But it's true.
1. Ratcliffe did his job, even if it was weak sauce. His job was to make an *intel* statement on the propaganda statement from the "51 officials."
Such a... 1/13
...statement by the DNI had to be about *intel.* It cd NOT legitimately be about confirming/vouching for laptop origin or contents. Not intel's lane.
Nor could he state it wasn't Russian disinfo. He could say there was no intel to support that assessment.
His assessment... 2/13
...on that matter - whether there was intel to support the 51's statement - was definitive. No other assessment would have been.
2. FBI might well have said more than "we have nothing to add to DNI's comments." It's not what folks would have wanted; i.e., full-throated... 3/13
Read 13 tweets
Mar 9
Weird indeed.
Note, in any case, that Iran statement from new USIC threat assessment is a masterpiece of disingenuousness.
s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2139…
1/13
The statement, from p. 15 of the assessment document.
"We continue to assess that Iran is not currently undertaking the key nuclear weapons-development activities that we judge would be necessary to produce a nuclear device. …"
2/13
Some of the disingenuous part:
"Iran continues to increase the size and enrichment level of its uranium stockpile beyond JCPOA limits. Iran continues to ignore restrictions on advanced centrifuge research and development and continues uranium enrichment operations at ..."
3/13
Read 13 tweets
Mar 9
Interesting sequence with Poland, US, and the MiG-29s.
Monday 7 Mar (reporting time 2053 GMT)
Iran envoy abruptly walks out of Vienna talks
reuters.com/world/middle-e…
1/3
Tuesday 8 Mar (reporting time 2022 GMT)
US govt disclaims knowledge of MiG-29 delivery plan thru Ramstein, says it's "untenable."
apnews.com/article/russia…
2/3
Wednesday 9 Mar (reporting time 1453 GMT)
Iran envoy back in Vienna to resume talks after sudden departure on Monday.
timesofisrael.com/top-iran-nucle…
Just interesting.
3/3
Read 4 tweets
Mar 7
Analyses predicting this are holding up well.
In this 12 Jan piece, I was off on how much of Ukraine Putin would put at immediate risk in an invasion. But the case that Putin's real goal is to divide & neutralize NATO stands.
…eoptimisticconservative.wordpress.com/2022/01/12/a-d… 1/4
Pull quote:
"I am confident NATO is not itching for an armed confrontation in Ukraine. The risk is not that there would be one, but that there would spectacularly not be an effective reaction to another Russian move there.
"Rather, it’s at least 50-50 that we would start...2/4
...to see the NATO consensus fall apart, on exactly the matters Putin seeks concessions on."
Putin's actions since indicate he has cut the cord with the status quo ante. That means it's no longer of use to him. It's not a constraint on what he will do.
His naughty list...3/4
Read 4 tweets
Mar 5
Not a bad place to be. No-fly zone is a badly flawed proposal in this situation.
Risk to enforcing forces would be significantly greater than in Iraq. Russia has threat of S400 & drawback of poor air space management capabilities.
Russia's using a lot of helos but ... 1/4
...relatively few fixed-wing aircraft (little need for fighter interceptors, & Ru ground strike aircraft relatively hard to defend from ground-to-air threats).
NFZ wd be mainly about helos. Escalation cost of classic model NFZ enforcement for that threat exceeds... 2/4
...benefit.
If US were a belligerent, obvious cost-benefit move wd be to destroy Russian air & SAM assets on ground in Ru/Belarus.
But we're NOT a belligerent, nor is there the slightest benefit to US, NATO or the planet in our becoming one.
Ukraine situation is ... 3/4
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 on Twitter!

:(