BREAKING: Sussmann's files motion to bar government's expert witness.
2/ (Not on courtlistener yet so no link to share.) Note what they don't say: They don't say that Sussmann didn't know that the experts had concerns or thought it could fool all but DNS experts.
3/ Argument in general:
4/ Interesting point re what evidence Durham might present. Does go to motive.
5/ Sussmann acknowleges it goes to state of mind and intent and also says he has no intent to offer evidence regarding such data.
6/ LOL Durham's expert isn't really and expert because he doesn't understand DNS data...exactly the type of expert Sussmann's gang aimed to trick!
7/ Sussmann again acknowledges if he had reason to doubt the accuracy it would be relevant to his state of mind, but claims "no evidence" he did....which is kinda strange if the reason Sussmann, as an attorney, allegedly hire Fusion, was to help understand and thus advise Clinton
8/ on legal risk re defamation, etc. So, you'd think before publishing it to a third party, he'd ask the source of concerns...unless Fusion wasn't assisting in giving legal advice but instea was just doing straight op-research.
9/ So main legal argument to keep expert out is: 1) irrelevant (yes, unless Sussmann makes an issues); 2) untimely. No set rule on untimeliness & given 6 weeks and speed & no continuences yet, I'd say, no not untimely; 3) expert isn't an expert on DNS (possible basis depending
10/10 what expert is to testify on (but that would only be in response to Sussmann presenting evidence it was accurate); 4) failed to give enough detail on opinion of expert. If I were government, I'd supplement w/ more detail, but not sure how that sorts out.
Continuing re Gov't Notice: This puts Sussmann in corner. If he claims he shared out of national security concern, that implies it is authentic. And then gov't pounces. Not it isn't that it "was" fabricated--but the "possibility." Possible > Plausible amirite? 1/
2/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2/ DOJ: Is not waiving defense to location, should be in Maryland if it is HABEAS. And says it is jurisdictionally barred.
Judge: If had to be brought in habeas because of relief sought, to extent habeas is not jurisdiction, but venue, you waived it.
DOJ: This is a new case so couldn't have waived.
3/ Judge: Same relief sought here.
DOJ: We did not assert a defense in Maryland that could only be brought in habeas. And this is a new claim.
Judge: You say not material whether under APA, non-statutory, habeas.
DOJ: Can't justify filing in D.C. and claim splitting. Reading: Upon arrival the individuals will be granted an immigration status consistent with South Sudan allows them to remain for period determined in South Sudan. Nothing to say detained, we didn't asked for it, and no reason to believe.
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Federal judge enters final judgment against Trump Administration in lawsuit challenging termination of grants, etc. Check out this "judicious" footnote: 1/
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Trump scores another SCOTUS victory in Birthright Citizenship Case (NOT ON MERITS) but on whether a universal injunction is permitted. HUGELY significant in every case with universal injunctions. 1/ Reading now. Analysis to follow
2/ SCOTUS punts on whether universal relief is necessary in the lawsuit brought by state given the difficulty in providing the states full relief, leaving that to lower court. This punt though doesn't change significance of case before here & in every other case against Trump.
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Judge Breyer wades in again re Trump's federalizing of California National Guard in case Newsom brought.
2/ Judge rejects Trump's argument that there cannot be a Posse Comitatus claim given 9th Cir. ruling that Trump could federalize national guard. Judge rejects Trump's request to transfer case to L.A. arguing public interest is to keep with him since he's already up on case.
3/ Court grants expedited discovery on issues related to what troops are doing for purpose of Posse Comitatus claim. So rulings all in favor of Newsom and kicking merits on Posse Comitatus out a month until discovery ends.
🚨SCOTUS delivered Trump another victory earlier today while I was shopping with DS. This case concerned the removal of illegal aliens ordered removed to third countries, with SCOTUS staying injunction barring such removal. 1/
2/ Dissent again rests on not liking what Trump did and ignoring numerous jurisdictional issues. supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf…
3/ Beyond resolving issue of aliens in limbo in South Sudan, SCOTUS decision gives Trump & DHS ability to push more forcefully for voluntarily removals.