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
Margot Cleveland Profile picture
@ProfMJCleveland
Apr 8, 2022 • 13 tweets • 4 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
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.
It's on courtlistener now: courtlistener.com/docket/6039058…
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
　

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

Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Nov 7
🚨BREAKING: New Jersey terrorism criminal complaint connected to foiled Dearborn Halloween plot has been unsealed. 1/ Image
2/ Full docket: courtlistener.com/docket/7188774…
3/ Full criminal complaint: Looks like it wasn't seal but not put on Pacer until today. courtlistener.com/docket/7188774…
Read 9 tweets
Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Nov 6
OMgosh. This judge is BONKERS! 1/ Image
Image
2/ Here's argument: Trump Administration can't "fix" state's incompetence or its system of distributing money. And it is ridiculous to say it is arbitrary and capricious to keep money for kids food for kids food. Image
3/ How in the hell does this judge think he has the authority to force the administration to take money from another program to pay SNAP benefits? Image
Read 4 tweets
Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Nov 5
THREAD on challenge to tariff: Opening this is tax. Common sense: Implausible Congress meant to let President to overhaul tariff. It is a one-way ratchet. It is a "sanction" statute, not a tariff statute.
1/
2/ Attorney: Verbs deal with embargoes but nothing about raising revenue. Many statute tariffs: Have many limits, this statute doesn't. Statutes say "tariffs" or equivalent.
Thomas: Going back to non-delegation point if, wouldn't that apply to embargoes.
Attorney: No. We aren't saying you can't delegate tariff you need to give "intelligent principles".
Justice Roberts: Foreign facing tax, but isn't that core power of Article II...and quite effective in achieving certain objectives.
Attorney: Think of this as Article I and Article II. Tariffs have foreign policy implications but founders gave that in Article I section 8 to Congress.
Justice Kavanaugh: If tariff were in the statute would that be acceptable and constitutionally permissible.
Attorney: Congress grant that authority to Presidents.
ME: WOW. He doesn't believe in non-delegation.
Justice Kavanaugh: What does Nixon stand for? Did Congress aware of that? Nixon announced in nationwide prime time speech, it wasn't a little piece of paper. Why didn't Congress change language?
Attorney: Nixon didn't rely on that statute and Nixon disagreed statute applied. The Circuit Court of Appeals decision doesn't change plain meaning. And even if Congress knew about it that doesn't help because case didn't say "unlimited authority," and use another statute. This president has torn up entire tariff architecture that Congress created.
3/ Justice Alito (?): Start with "regulate importation" would you agree that includes fees.
Attorney: NO.
Alito: "Regulate admission to park" can that include fee.
Attorney: Not helpful answer. Tries to distinguish from tariffs.
Alito: Are tariffs always revenue raising? What if imposed tariff to take effect in 90 days and agreement is reached is that a tax?
Attorney: This is obviously revenue raising. Taxation is different.
Alito: You cite many different provisions, what if imposed in an emergency?
Attorney: You need more precisions. Never has Congress added a tariff authority.
Read 14 tweets
Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Nov 5
THREAD: SCOTUS Tariff argument live summary. 1/
2/ John Sauer opens with summary of why Trump has power, framing as foreign affairs.
Thomas: Ask why major question doctrine doesn't apply.
Sauer: In foreign affair context, you expect Congress to give major powers, since he has Article 2 power.
Justice Kagan (I think): What kind of Article 2 powers are you relying on.
Sauer: President has broad authority in foreign affairs.
3/ Sauer: Article 2 power PLUS sweeping delegation by Congress and we are giving you Article 1. We aren't saying it is power to tax, but to regulate.
Justice Alito (?): Damsin Moore (spelling). We said very narrow, we confined to very questions in that yet you keep citing. Different provision of federal statute.
Sauer: We don't dispute narrow opinion but say it addressed same principles that apply here.
Justice Kagan (?): I just don't understand this argument. You are saying this isn't tax but it is a tax. You are saying this is regulatory but I don't understand this argument. Or that foreign powers or even an emergency say it can do away with major questions doctrine.
Sauer: Court has never applied in foreign affair.
Justice Kagan: Could have declared a national emergency in global warning and then forgiven student loans.
Sauer: gets cut off again.
Justice Kagan: Why does Congress always use tariff and regulate but not here.
Sauer: Cites another case but cut off.
Justice Kagan: cuts off again. AUGH. I think she has a good point but can't follow because she cuts off Sauer.
Read 15 tweets
Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Nov 4
Re-upping this because . . .
2/
3/ ...and since I'm talking ERA, one of my fondest memories of my mom...
Read 4 tweets
Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Nov 3
This is going to be one hot mess for the states to figure out! Image
2/ This is what you ordered, your honor: Image
3/ But, yeah, we're not going to starve kids: Image
Image
Image
Read 8 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!

:(