THREAD: Oh, but let me tell you how UN-politicized Garland’s DoJ is.
People on the right are crying foul, saying Joe Biden and Merrick Garland are going after trump for political reasons.
Are they though?
Not even close. 1/
First, it was Acting Attorney General Rosen - left over from the trump administration- that OPENED the non-partisan DoJ IG investigation into former DoJ officials’ potential interference in the peaceful transfer of power. That probe was opened BEFORE Garland got there. 2/
Then in October of 2021, Garland swore under oath to congress that he would accept the recommendations of that DoJ IG probe - meaning that probe was still ongoing in the fall of 2021. 3/
Then between his testimony and January of 2022, Garland must have gotten those NON PARTISAN recommendations. And he then appointed Thomas Windom to investigate the top of the coup. 4/
THEN, they waited for the 1/6 BI-PARTISAN select committee to finish their work so DoJ could ensure consistency among testimony they got from the federal grand jury and testimony from witnesses to the committee. 5/
THEN, once Donald announced his candidacy, Garland appointed special counsel Jack Smith to take over the 1/6 probe from Windom and the documents probe from Garland’s Public Integrity Unit. THEN a GRAND JURY of Donald’s peers voted to indict him. 6/
So, no. This isn’t political. This was the most a-political (and therefore slowly-moving) set of investigations in history. Non-partisan IG, bi-partisan committee, independent prosecutor, and grand jury. So sit down, republicans. You’re way out of your league. END/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREAD: ANATOMY OF AN OP: HOW SAUDI-BACKED TWITTER IS SILENCING VALUABLE VOICES IN SCIENCE, ACADEMICS, AND POLITICS:
Follow me on a journey down a troll op rabbit hole. Here’s how it works:
STEP ONE: Lure you into a debate. 1/
They do this by either creating anonymous accounts & targeting topics you care about, or by bribing you into debate with $$ or a large platform.
The purpose is to ask misleading questions designed to elicit a specific response they can use out of context to discredit you. 2/
Once they have those out-of-context replies that appear to contradict your in-context assertions, they mobilize a digital army using DM "war rooms" to FLOOD your tweets with replies containing their farmed "gotcha" moments. If you don't debate, they call you a coward. 3/
THREAD: HOW JACK SMITH OUTSMARTED BILL BARR AND TRUMP: something I don’t see anyone talking about is the ingenious way Jack Smith’s indictment of trump moots a DoJ OLC memo Barr wrote years ago about trump and obstruction. 1/
You may remember a while ago there was a court battle to unseal an OLC memo Bill Barr wrote about the Mueller obstruction charges. The judge ultimately decided the memo was NOT subject to deliberative process privilege and had to be released. 2/
Merrick Garland didn’t appeal the decision, allowing most of it to come out. The memo was written by the PADAG and some others in the OLC within hours of Mueller turning in his report on the Russia investigation to Bill Barr. 3/
NEW: @JoyceWhiteVance just said on @MSNBC: CIPA (the classified information production act that governs this case) includes an IMMEDIATE right of EXPEDITED APPEAL. So if DoJ doesn’t like a decision by Aileen Cannon, they can go STRAIGHT to the 11th circuit. 1/
That gives DoJ not only the opportunity to appeal her substantive decisions, but it also gives DoJ an automatic trigger to ask the 11th circuit to REASSIGN the case to a different judge QUICKLY. END/
THREAD: WHAT DID PENCE TELL THE GRAND JURY? As you know, the former VP tried to quash his grand jury subpoena making broad claims that the Speech or Debate clause shielded him from having to testify about anything related to 1/6. 1/
The chief judge - Boasberg - largely denied his motion, compelling Pence to testify about most of the things prosecutors wanted to ask about. The ruling gives us a tiny bit of insight into what prosecutors were asking. 2/
The court held that the Speech or Debate clause DOES apply to the VP, but also concludes only a few narrow lines of questioning are covered by the privilege. 3/
THREAD: SPECULATION: This is what I think happened with the documents at Mar-a-Lago based on bits and pieces assembled from public reporting. THIS IS SPECULATION. 1/
May 11, 2022: The Office of Donald J. Trump is subpoenaed for all documents with classified markings. Trump asks his lawyer, Evan Corcoran, if there's a way to defy the subpoena. Corcoran tells him there's not and memorialized that conversation in detailed notes. 2/
Trump contacts his valet Walt nauta and tells him to move documents boxes from the storage area to his residence, and then Donald goes through the boxes and removes the classified documents he wants to keep. 3/
THREAD: Let's step back from the audio of donald waving around a classified Iran document for a minute and remember that he had over a HUNDRED of these and DoJ found them when they searched Mar-a-Lago. This case does not hinge on this one document. 1/
The reason this tape is important is because it shows trump knew he couldn't declassify things with his mind (if the reporting on the audio is accurate). 2/
ALSO, if trumps lawyers turned over MORE classified documents this March after DoJ subpoenaed the Iran doc, then DoJ was correct when it posited that donald hadn't handed over all the documents and still had some as recently as this spring. 3/