Thread by @MuellerSheWrote

THREAD: WHY DOJ *MUST* HAVE THE 1/6 COMMITTEE TRANSCRIPTS BEFORE THEY INDICT:: I figured since the report and transcripts are about to be released, I’d remind everyone why DoJ needs the transcripts - and it’s not because they don’t want to do the work themselves. 1/

Does everyone remember when Durham was appointed by the trump administration to investigate the investigation into the trump-Russia investigation? Donald called it the “oranges” of the probe. He was convinced it was a “witch hunt” and the dems “spied” on his campaign. 2/

Donald even sued everyone involved in the probe, and judge shopped in hopes of getting Aileen Cannon - but he got Judge Middlebrooks - who dismissed his dumb lawsuit and then slapped his lawyers with $63K in sanctions. 3/

We also know Durham FAILED to secure a SINGLE conviction after right wing howlers thought Obama and HRC and 29 other people would end up in Gitmo. One of two people charged by Durham was acquitted - HRC campaign lawyer Michael Sussman. 3/

Besides having no proof of a material lie by Sussman, Durham’s STAR witness - Jim Baker - was summarily impeached at trial by Sussman’s lawyers. And that brings us to how this is relevant to WHY DoJ needs the 1/6 transcripts and IG transcripts before they can make a case. 4/

Jim Baker was interviewed about his meeting with Sussman by the DoJ Inspector General, Durham’s Grand Jury, and CONGRESS. He was a shit witness because he gave CONFLICTING testimony to Congress, the IG, and the Grand Jury. That INCONSISTENT testimony made him unreliable. 5/

DoJ needs the transcripts from the 1/6 committee for a lot of reasons, but one big one is that they have to ensure CONSISTENCY between the accounts given to Congress and the testimony given in the federal Grand Jury/Juries (there’s more than one Grand Jury). 6/

They ALSO need the testimony given to the Inspector General (remember the IG launched 2 probes into 1/6 in January, 2021). DoJ has to COMPARE these accounts of potential witnesses against Donald for CONSISTENCY so their witnesses are unimpeachable at trial. 7/

Some may ask why the DoJ hasn’t subpoenaed folks like Bobb or Hutchinson or Meadows - but we don’t know if they’ve been subpoenaed or interviewed voluntarily because DoJ asks potential witnesses to NOT speak publicly about it. Some do, some don’t. 8/

Remember, DoJ asked the 1/6 committee for the fraudulent elector scheme witness transcripts first - in September - and right after that, they began raining subpoenas on the fraudulent electors right before the 60 day election blackout period. 9/

Then after the election, they began issuing subpoenas for state election officials (MI, WI, and AZ), and then Secretaries of State (MI, AZ). They were likely (and I don’t know this for sure, but) using 1/6 and IG testimony to prep for Grand Jury testimony. 10/

In a way, the 1/6 committee’s schedule kind of dictated when DoJ could subpoena witnesses and how the DoJ would craft their grand jury questions. The 1/6 committee started later than desirable because the GOP delayed it with their shenanigans. 11/

Anyhow, that’s one of the many reasons DoJ needed the 1/6 committee to finish its work and provide transcripts of testimony BEFORE they could bring a case. As the DoJ is now getting that information, along with the documents from the special master, it’s on like Donkey Kong. END/