@Jim_Jordan Among other things this "report" does is provide proof that those who signed the letter believed what they wrote--that the "laptop" had the hallmarks of a RU info operation.
Jordan has, in fact, proved the letter was TRUE.
@Jim_Jordan Jordan also provided proof that the former spooks took care to distinguish between info op and false -- again, proving that many claims Jordan and others have made were false.
Is Jordan so dumb he doesn't realize he has proven himself wrong?
@Jim_Jordan Jordan also provided proof that the former spooks took care to avoid saying true things (about Biden's effort to combat Ukrainian corruption) but that might smack of politics.
@Jim_Jordan Jordan also provided evidence that James Clapper made a(nother) accurate, true, edit.
AN EDIT!!!!! Can you imagine making an EDIT!?!?!?!?!
@Jim_Jordan Jordan also provided proof that the former spooks obtained the required PRB approval.
He's literally proving that they did nothing wrong.
@Jim_Jordan BREAKING: Jim Jordan provided proof that John Ratcliffe used his position as DNI to make a political statement.
HE FOUND WEAPONIZATION, and it's name is John Ratcliffe.
@Jim_Jordan Then Jordan egregiously misrepresents a letter FBI sent to Ron Johnson--basically claiming a Glomar letter, saying they couldn't say anything, endorsed Ratcliffe's letter.
[Note, we know FBI had not assessed this yet.]
My goodness Jordan is intent on weaponizing government.
@Jim_Jordan Then Jordan provides proof that those who organized the letter had no intent of involving active CIA employees.
Is Jordan a DNC plant? Because he keeps proving there was nothing wrong with this letter!
@Jim_Jordan Then Jordan admits--ADMITS!!!--he is using his committee to investigate the legal free speech of a political campaign.
This should be the headline: That Jordan ADMITS he is misusing his committee to attack the First Amendment.
@Jim_Jordan Here Jordan is complaining that the spooks told reporters that they weren't sure whether the contents of the laptop were authentic or not (note, 3 years later WE STILL DON'T KNOW thta more than 20% was authentic).
Like LITERALLY bitching that the spooks included caveats.
@Jim_Jordan Here Jordan provides evidence that the letter was not that impactful, the total opposite of what he claims.
@Jim_Jordan Then Jordan quotes the NYP making false claims about the letter (which is true).
And provides ZERO proof that the letter led to the "suppression" of the laptop hoax.
To this day, there has been no proof of wrongdoing obtained from the laptop. It REMAINS a shiny object
@Jim_Jordan Then Jordan quotes Trump making a false claim--it's the laptop from hell--and Biden making an accurate one--that a bunch of spooks said it had the hallmarks of a RU op.
Again, Trump is the one lying here, but Jordan presents it as proof of -- something.
@Jim_Jordan Then Jordan bitches that the former spooks pointed out how inappropriate it was for him to investigate their exercise of free speech.
He claims that Congress may investigate any former spook, which should cause concern for Ric Grenell.
@Jim_Jordan BREAKING: Jim Jordan asserts with no evidence that the "laptop" and all its contents were real.
Jim Jordan has to do something to distract from the fact that Trump was found liable for sexual assault.
It'll work, too! We can spend the day IDing which reporters are ESPECIALLY stupid.
But this report is ... full of evidence that he's lying.
@Jim_Jordan It would be nice if most outlets reported this as what it is, a confession from Jordan that he is abusing his position and making false claims about the abundant proof that there was nothing wrong here. It's a shameless attack on free speech.
@Jim_Jordan Ultimately, Jordan is using his position to whine that most of the press wasn't stupid enough in 2020 to believe Drunken Rudy over 50 experts.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
.@SenatorRisch is also lying about the Hunter Biden laptop. Total liar about what the letter said (or perhaps he's illiterate?), now trying to make sure 51 people who were honest lose their clearnce.
Why does Senator Risch want to run interference for Rudy's alleged hacking?
Why is @SenatorRisch supporting the alleged private hacking of exposed persons?
@SenatorRisch JUST DOUBLING DOWN on his lies. He claims the letter was obviously false. The letter remains 100% true.
Let's look at how CNN covers up how Trump used pardons TO GET people to lie.
CNN dismisses Manafort's FARA crimes (lying to hide on whose behalf he was influence-peddling) as "among other things" and never mentions he was found to have lied abt 2016.
"Among other things" shows up in describing Stone's crime.
Stone was always quite clear he was refusing to share contents of ~30 2016 convos he had with Trump, which pertained to how he had advance knowledge of RU actions. edition.cnn.com/2024/05/14/pol…
CNN doesn't describe what Flynn lied to investigations ABOUT (besides that he was on the take from Türkiye during the election, which goes unmentioned).
Flynn lied ABOUT secretly working w/RU to undermine Obama policies, including on sanctions.
Since Manafort's ties to Oleg Deripaska are being laundered in the news, here's the email Manafort sent Deripaska hoping to "brief you in more detail" about his thoughts on the campaign.
One should assume that Manafort has been doing the same (who knows whom to) in recent weeks, since he was working for "free."
Then, after he was "off the campaign" (as he now claims to be) he was still sending instructions, such as projecting (even AFTER the Jim Comey disaster in October) that Hillary would claim vote fraud if she lost.
Broidy would have been, but he got pardoned first
Ditto Mike Flynn: Pardoned first.
That's leaving aside Navarro (6), Bannon (7), and Weisselbeg (8) bc they were late adopters.
Maybe write it this way: "Paul Manafort was part of a crime spree associated with Trump's first campaign rivaled only by Nixon, ignoring the 100s jailed so far for Jan6."
As you read @rparloff's compelling argument Cannon is going to do campaign work for Donald Trump, compare how 2 other Trump appointed judges rejected Hunter Biden's claim that Trump politicized that investigation.
Trump PROVABLY intervened in the Hunter Biden case, arguably violating IRS code in doing so.
Trump attacked David Weiss, after which Weiss started fearing for his family and reneged on a plea deal.
Bill Barr set up a side channel that ended up framing Joe Biden, and that fabricated claim about Joe Biden is almost certainly what David Weiss reneged on the plea deal to chase.
Here's a picture Stan Woodward used to show what Trump's boxes look like. He showed how one of these boxes, with over 30 docs marked Secret and Confidential, had doc order shifted.
Here's what most important box in Rob Hur's investigation of Joe Biden looked like--before & after.
Even just eyeballing shows how much got moved around.
It didn't stop Hur from offering conclusions based on location. And right wingers didn't accuse him of evidence tampering.
Mind you, proximity was absolutely central to Hur's argument--the one right wingers argue wasn't aggressive enough.
It is highly likely that none of the docs in Woodward's box are even charged.