2/
"[L]acking is analysis of what should have occurred and who was responsible for the massive security failure ... The absence of any such conclusive analysis leaves ample room for conspiracy theorists to string disparate facts together and weave elaborate yet believable lies."
3/ To add to Harvin's analysis:
The committee's report thus leaves space for conspiracy theories to thrive ... the very kind of conspiracies that drive anti-government extremism...the very kind of extremism that helped propel the attack on January 6th and remains ongoing threat.
5/ Indeed, listening to Rep. Raskin and reading @donell_harvin, many of us can't help but think and hope that @SenatorDurbin and the Senate Judiciary Committee should take up where the January 6th Committee left off in this space.
6/ Here's audio clip (and, in following tweet, transcription) of @RepRaskin interview.
Really great questions (including follow-up questions) by @Isikoff and thoughtful, substantive answers by Raskin.
On Jan. 6 Committee’s inability to nail down answers to intelligence failure.
7/7 Finally, a transcription of that audio clip.👇
<end>
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"Special counsel Jack Smith has received a trove of new documents from local election officials in Wisconsin and Nevada who were subpoenaed as part of the ongoing criminal investigation," including communications with Trump lawyers.
2. "The documents provided by Clark County[Nevada] officials did not include any communications with Trump directly but did show lawyers working for the former president raising concerns about potential election fraud that were later found to be baseless." cnn.com/2023/01/04/pol…
3. More on Nevada communications sent to DOJ:
"Trump’s allies also demanded information about workers who were tasked with counting the votes, a request the county registrar sought to delay out of fear for the workers’ safety"
3. As for Meadows's criminal liability for false electors scheme.
Week of November 18:
Meadows gets "a spreadsheet that the Trump Campaign had compiled. It listed contact information for nearly all of the 79 GOP nominees" who could serve as false electors (#January6thReport).
As I discussed with @ErinBurnett@OutFrontCNN, it’s 100% a crime if Trump-affiliated lawyer Mr. Passantino said to Cassidy Hutchinson what she testified.
= suborning perjury
Only question is if DOJ could prove it.
As discussed, looks like significant proof at hand…
<thread>
2. Evidence
Hutchinson _contemporaneously_ confided in a friend about what Passantino was telling her to do.
Hutchinson _contemporaneously_ confided in former Trump WH official @Alyssafarah and former Republican Congresswoman @BarbaraComstock obtaining their assistance to address what Passantino was telling her to do.
Individuals involved in obstructing J6 investigation: Many.
Tony Ornato needs a very good defense attorney.👇
2. "Again, as with Section 1512(c), the conspiracy under Section 371 appears to have also included other individuals such as Chesebro, Rudolph Giuliani, and Mark Meadows, but this Committee does not attempt to determine all of the participants of the conspiracy..."
3. “Others working with Eastman likely share in Eastman’s culpability. For example, Kenneth Chesebro was a central player in the scheme to submit fake electors ...”
With news that the #January6th Sub-committee has proposed criminal referral of Trump for, among other statutes, 18 USC 2383 (assisting an Insurrection) (@kyledcheney@nicholaswu12 reporting)
Read this expert analysis of why that statute might best fit.
“Among the charges that subcommittee proposes for Trump: 18 U.S.C. 2383 Insurrection; 18 U.S.C. 1512(c) obstruction of an official proceeding; and 18 U.S.C. 371 Conspiracy to defraud the United States government.” politico.com/news/2022/12/1…
3. Plus a second article by same criminal law expert @UChicagoLaw’s Al Alschuler: