emptywheel Profile picture
May 25 9 tweets 4 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
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.

washingtonpost.com/national-secur… Image
So let's unpack what this story really says. One of the most important details is that the GJ hasn't sat since May 5, 3 Fridays ago. Image
That means two of the last live bodies the GJ have seen are Matthews Calamari Sr and Jr.

They were asked why Walt Nauta called after DOJ sent a subpoena for surveillance footage.

Want your additional instance of obstruction? There ya go!

theguardian.com/us-news/2023/m… Image
But we also know that NARA handed over docs on Trump being lectured about classification yesterday.

As I noted when CNN reported that, you don't need these letters for an obstruction investigation.

edition.cnn.com/2023/05/17/pol… Image
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."

As noted, these guys have done this before.
emptywheel.net/2023/04/03/the…
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. Image
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. Image
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. Image
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. Image

• • •

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

Keep Current with emptywheel

emptywheel 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 @emptywheel

May 25
A comment about the latest Jan6 militia arrest, for Daniel Edwin Wilson arrest, whose Jan6 arrest was made public today.

justice.gov/usao-dc/press-…
On the back end, Wilson was just a tourist. He is not (yet) described as doing anything of interest on Jan6.

Just gesticulating wildly about the mob. Image
On the front end, Wilson was plotting with Persons 1, 2, and 3 to overthrow the govt as early as December 22, which is pretty early.

So maybe DOJ will charge a conspiracy eventually. Image
Read 7 tweets
May 25
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.com/articles/fbi-s… Image
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. Image
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.
Read 5 tweets
May 24
Say, is this a bad time to note that David Sacks had a significant hand in setting off the bank run that killed SVB?
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.
Read 8 tweets
May 24
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?
Read 4 tweets
May 24
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. Image
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. Image
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. Image
Read 12 tweets
May 24
Reup: ABC Reports that Sources Familiar Say 2 + 2 = 5

emptywheel.net/2023/05/24/abc…

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.
Read 11 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!

:(