WaPo still seems unaware that DOJ confirmed it had found 3 classified docs in a desk drawer in Trump's office, including one "compiled" with docs that post-date Trump's WH departure. That's been public for 6 months.
This WaPo story (as an earlier one) likes to imply this is an obstruction investigation. It reads "obstruction obstruction obstruction mishandling obstruction obstruction obstruction obstruction."
This is another instance where WaPo is struggling to describe Espionage Act evidence as obstruction evidence.
Showing people not cleared to see docs is a more serious violation of 18 USC 793(e).
And that's if they're nice Americans who love their country.
Here's a detail that really important for weedy reasons. Calamaris were interviewed abt gaps in surveillance footage. We can now be sure (we already were, but whatev) that those gaps don't include June 2.
I've proposed the gaps may hide something more serious than obstruction.
Maybe the gap in the surveillance footage is from this "dress rehearsal."
That might explain why it would show up in a court opinion.
But THAT might explain why DOJ asked for the business records.
This, tho, is the most intriguing bit in the story.
Fresh off creating subpoena compliance theater, Nauta loaded up the SUV where Trump was hosting [bum bum BUM] the Saudis.
Remember: Boris Epshtyen tried to obstruct the Bedminster search.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In a piece on FISA that gets a lot of details wrong, WSJ says that the solution to a FISA Court that DOCUMENTED what it deems as horrible abuses is to let Congress directly intervene in FBI investigations.
WSJ points to Executive Branch maximalists to say we don't need a court.
They don't mention that ONE REASON FBI queries weren't fixed after standard changed is bc Executive Branch maximalist, Bill Barr, the grandfather of this surveillance, made only cosmetic fixes.
It will not surprise you that, in a piece demanding political accountability for FISA, WSJ chose not to hold Bill Barr politically accountable for failing to fix this.
Ah well, I'm sure it was just another sign of Elmo's genius that he shut down that expensive server in Sacramento...
Think of all the money he's saving right now!
Not actually watching the DeSantis meltdown but there hasn't been something THIS fun to watch on the wall of Plato's Twitter cave since Mark Sanford's Appalachian Trail presser.
I'm grateful WaPo describes how Trump grievance farms (tho would have appreciated a fact check of some claims).
But I don't understand how promising to pardon Jan6ers is different than pardons Trump ALREADY used to get out of RU investigation trouble which WaPo doesn't mention.
Am I the only one who remembers that Trump pardoned his way out of the LAST criminal investigation?
Why don't all the major outlets have like one story a week talking about how outrageous Trump's PAST pardons were, and not just those of Stone, Manafort, and Flynn?
Because the frothers claim that John Durham never got Marc Elias' testimony, Here's the part of Michael Sussmann trial transcript from May 18 of last year--just over a year ago--when Marc Elias was sworn in, something Trump has never done in the investigations into his actions.
Here's where Elias explained to Andrew DeFilippis like he was a child that people in Brooklyn were generally not at meetings with Fusion held in DC, because Brooklyn is not in DC.
Here's Marc Elias--who the right wing is claiming never testified--testifying under oath about the things that Fusion did for the campaign that they never talk about.
Seeing WAYYYYYY too many journalists who know better treating that Truth Social post as the kind of letter Jim Trusty would send if he really wanted to sit down with a prosecutor.
If you want to sit down with a prosecutor pre-indictment, you go to the prosecutor, not his boss who is recused PRECISELY BECAUSE being more involved would be politically inappropriate.
This letter is, in part, an attempt to politicize something Garland depoliticized.
If you want to sit down with a prosecutor pre-indictment, you don't lie to the Attorney General, who knows better, as every single beat reporter who is covering this knows better.