Share this page!

Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Twitter logo
Jul 25 • 6 tweets • 4 min read
Looks like a significant development.

Justice Dept January 6th investigation reaches into White House witnesses.

Former VP Pence chief of staff Marc Short highest official known to appear before grand jury.

His appearance doesn’t fit neatly with prior known scope of probe.
2. From what we know and all Marc Short’s testimony publicly disclosed by January 6 committee, he has the most evidence to give if DOJ wants to pursue this line of inquiry.👇

@BarbMcQuade’s model prosecution memo on the conspiracy to pressure Mike Pence.

justsecurity.org/80308/united-s…
3. The ABC News scoop is linked in my first tweet. But in case helpful see below (reporting by @KFaulders @alex_mallin @Santucci)

Former Pence chief of staff appeared before grand jury probing Jan. 6: Sources
abcnews.go.com/US/pence-chief…
4. Most importantly, Marc Short has significant testimony he could give that implicates Trump.

Also importantly, he can give testimony that significantly implicates Mark Meadows.

This nugget from #January6thCommitteeHearing.👇

5. A key that unlocks the door to criminal obstruction of the congressional proceedings is whether the individual (eg Trump-Meadows-Eastman) knew Pence did not have authority to block the certification of electoral votes.

Short has direct information that Meadows knew.
6. NYT @alanfeuer @maggieNYT confirm and add that “Mr. Short, who was subpoenaed by federal prosecutors, spent two to three hours in front of the grand jury on Friday, according to two people familiar with the matter.”

nytimes.com/2022/07/25/us/…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Ryan Goodman

Ryan Goodman 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 @rgoodlaw

Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Jul 26
A gift to prosecutors

AZ fake elector organizer to Trump Campaign adviser:

“We would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted”
2. This email also evidence for the prosecution.

AZ fake electors propose “keep it under wraps until Congress counts the vote Jan. 6th (so we can try to ‘surprise’ the Dems and media with it)."

Not how alternate electors ever work. Their intent is to gum up/obstruct the process Image
3. Consciousness of guilt:

"The emails were apparently not shared with lawyers in the White House Counsel’s Office, who advised that the 'fake electors' plan was not legally sound, or other lawyers on the campaign."
Read 4 tweets
Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Jul 22
In key #January6thHearing testimony, Joint Chiefs Chair Milley:

"No Call? Nothing? Zero?" from Trump to DoD.

But ask yourself: why didn't DoD call Trump?

@justinhendrix and my take on most plausible theory: DoD fear Trump use military to hold onto power
justsecurity.org/79623/crisis-o…
2. Our analysis was in Dec 21 (addressing larger question what explained National Guard delay).

New reporting (@MarkMazzettiNYT @maggieNYT) is consistent with our analysis, though implicitly points to DoD concerns of "optics" more than actual use of Guard
nytimes.com/2022/07/21/us/…
3. Nugget in NYT backs up Miller's earlier testimony:

"The president did tell advisers in the days before Jan. 6, 2021, that he wanted a National Guard presence, BUT it appeared he wanted the troops as extra protection for his supporters, his aides have privately acknowledged."
Read 6 tweets
Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Jul 19
I asked experts if Dominion Voting Systems could now sue Trump.

Backdrop: #January6thHearings revealed Trump was well informed that accusations were false.

Upshot: Makes for a powerful case of #Defamation.

Could sue for over a billion $$.

<thread>
justsecurity.org/82447/8-top-ex…
2. First Amendment living legend, Floyd Abrams:

“Dominion would have an extremely powerful libel case against him. Statements Trump made about the company were extraordinarily defamatory, provably false and enormously harmful.”

justsecurity.org/82447/8-top-ex…
3. Professor @zahr_said (@UWSchoolofLaw):

“Holding Mr. Trump legally liable for defamation would … provide significant public and institutional censure that could herald a change in our legal system’s apparent tolerance of outright misinformation”

justsecurity.org/82447/8-top-ex…
Read 7 tweets
Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Jul 17
A warning of profound weaknesses in US national security institutions in wake of authoritarian impulses and USG personnel who fall prey to #disinformation.

Authored by @douglaslondon5 who served in CIA's Clandestine Service for more than 34 years.

justsecurity.org/82360/us-democ…
2. “There are other Michael Flynns and Brad Johnsons still in service across America’s military, intelligence, and law enforcement communities.”
3. “Within the intelligence community, I witnessed the eager politicization to facilitate Trump’s agenda, and it was a key factor driving my retirement.”

Thank you to Doug London for writing this analysis and these reflections.

justsecurity.org/82360/us-democ…
Read 4 tweets
Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Jul 16
WSJ article says Justice Dept recently expanded #January6th probe thanks to committee's work.

Notes of caution:

1. WSJ says investigation of Trump's "orbit" and "allies." Does not say of Trump as a target.
(NYT report of inaction was keyed into latter.)
wsj.com/articles/justi…
2. Some thought assignment of U.S. Attorney Windom in late 2021 was a sign of expanding probe toward Trump.

But WSJ says: "Windom previously met with some skepticism within the department when he pushed to explore the activities of several members of Mr. Trump’s inner circle."
3. So what has changed at DOJ due to select committee's work?

WSJ says Hutchinson's testimony has "broadened SOME Justice Department officials’ view of the potential scope of the probe ... though officials said the testimony DIDN'T prompt ANY change in investigative strategy."
Read 5 tweets
Ryan Goodman Profile picture
Jul 12
What a blight on Justice Department.

Clear evidence of potential crimes in

DOJ coup attempt
threats to Georgia officials
pressure on Pence
attack on Capitol

Yet paralysis reigned at highest levels of DOJ. Trump’s name and behavior rarely even mentioned.
nytimes.com/2022/07/11/us/…
2. “Overt discussion of Mr. Trump and his behavior had been rare, except as a motive for the actions of others.”

And what has Hutchinson’s testimony done?

“Jolted” them

Jolted them to take action? To convene a grand jury? To investigate Trump as a target?

No, the answer is…
3. Hutchinson’s “electrifying public testimony … jolted top Justice Department officials into DISCUSSING the topic of Mr. Trump more directly, at times in the presence of Attorney General Merrick B. Garland and Deputy Attorney General Lisa O. Monaco.”
Read 5 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!

:(