Here's the thing: when you don't have the facts, it's foolhardy to get over your skis being certain about any of this...but it's also entirely rational to fall back on your priors about the people, institutions, & incentives in play.
One of those priors is Trump being shady, but another is the known record of FBI misconduct in getting warrants against him under the last D POTUS, which can't be dismissed as "old news" in this context.
And as to incentives, the White House & DOJ right now are run by people with a panting & visible desperation to keep Trump in the news & use stray voltage tactics to rally his supporters around him to prevent them from moving on (say, to DeSantis.)
If you want to talk people out of those entirely rational frameworks, you need radical transparency with hard facts.
"Trust us, we're the FBI" isn't gonna work in a Trump investigation. If you claim not to understand why, you're six years behind the plot.
At the same time, FBI & DOJ know perfectly well by now how this plays with Biden's #Resistance base ahead of the midterm. They can't possibly claim that doing this now, then keeping silent on the justifications, isn't producing precisely that political reaction.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin 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 @baseballcrank

Jul 8
This is how people talk themselves into violence. Imagine tweeting this the morning after a major world leader was assassinated, about a guy who had an armed assassin arrested outside his house last month.
Another example of how people talk themselves into supporting mob violence, riots, & assassinations
I can think of all manner of bad things that various left-wing political figures *deserve* to have happen to them, but I remain firmly opposed to mobs threatening & harassing them in daily life, not least because the logic of that leads to ever darker places for all of us.
Read 6 tweets
Jun 28
We lived with the Supreme Court pushing the culture to the left for decades. It pushes the culture to the right for two weeks, & progressives are screaming for Court-packing, radical restructuring, jurisdiction-stripping, etc. Incapable of accepting the legitimacy of ever losing.
The lesson, as always: progressives will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever accept the legitimacy of any system or institution in which they don't win all the time.
Progressivism cannot tolerate democracy, pluralism, or classical liberalism of any kind. All outcomes must go one way, all dissent must be crushed, every setback must be met with attacks on the system & conspiracy theories.
Read 8 tweets
Jun 24
Today in Democrats against the legitimacy of American elections.
United States Senator, all about respecting our institutions of American government:
Read 7 tweets
Jun 24
Becerra v Empire is out, strange lineup, but no mention of Chevron.
Thomas & Barrett plus the libs is a weird 5-4 majority
Leading with a Kagan opinion = no Kavanaugh, Gorsuch or Barrett opinions today = no way this is the last day of the Term.
Read 37 tweets
Jun 23
Keith Olbermann, US Senator: same energy
This is basically the Olbermann argument in more sophisticated language
More Democratic rejection of the legitimacy of our governing institutions:
Read 4 tweets
Jun 23
Gorsuch: "More than once a North Carolina attorney general
has opposed laws enacted by the General Assembly and declined to defend them fully in federal litigation." State legislators can intervene.
Berger is good as a process matter - court cases should feature a full adversarial airing of the issues, not collusive game-throwing - but it taps into the broader issue (hot in Election Clauses cases) of how much the Court defers to how states describe the division of power.
Vega: No 1983 claim for Miranda violations.
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!

:(