6."On several occasions, Mark Meadows claimed to have no knowledge of the Trump campaign’s efforts to contest the election results" (via @AmyEGardner)
a) Shows prosecutors what cards he'll play
b) If prosecutors can show he's lying, he's in deeper trouble washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/…
@AmyEGardner 7. Here's the more full report by @AmyEGardner on Mark Meadows' - in testimony - denying knowledge of various Trump Campaign efforts to contest election results in Georgia and Pennsylvania.👇
9. Meadows who has testified he was the gatekeeper now says he can't recall details of arranging for Cleta Mitchell and two other Trump Campaign lawyers to be on the Raffensperger call.👇
10. Note the DA subpoenaed both Trump Campaign lawyers who were on that Trump-Raffensperger call for today's hearing, Kurt Hilbert and Alex Kaufman.
11. This claim by Meadows does him some good (but won't work on Raffensperger call in which he actively participated).
"He said he attended numerous meetings and listened in on many phone calls that were political in nature simply to end the conversations at the right time."
12.
On left:
Among most damaging evidence showing Meadows' conduct was political is Act 96 in indictment. Meadows texted GA official if they can speed up their work "if the trump campaign assist financially."
On right:
Meadows' testimony on this, riddled with problems.
13. DA saved strongest question for last: Meadows' involvement with false electors.
That has no nexus to presidential duties.
Meadows' response is perhaps telling:
"As chief of staff, no I did not coordinate those efforts."
Devastating first-hand witness to Alex Pretti's killing
Declaration filed in federal court:
"I don't know why they shot him. He was only helping. I was five feet from him and they just shot him."
2/ "The agents pulled the man on the ground. I didn't see him touch any of them-he wasn't even turned toward them. It didn't look like he was trying to resist, just trying to help the woman up. I didn't see him with a gun."
"I have read the statement from DHS about what happened and it is wrong. The man did not approach the agents with a gun. He approached them with a camera. He was just trying to help a woman get up and they took him to the ground."
Here's what the Justice Department actually told the Supreme Court, and how DOJ defends ICE's use of racially profiling.
Full analysis on my YouTube and Substack
🧵
2/ Shareable link to full analysis⤵️
A close look at what the DOJ left undisputed.
And how DOJ admitted to the courts that stopping racial profiling would “upend immigration enforcement efforts” in the way ICE currently carries it out.
3/ Document
U.S. Solicitor General to the Supreme Court arguing to allow racially profiling as a factor supporting ICE's "reasonable suspicion."
A time for choosing, from main street to wall street.
"This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress’s oversight role. .... Those are pretexts."
2/ "I have served at the Federal Reserve under four administrations, Republicans and Democrats alike. ... Public service sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats."
3/ "I will continue to do the job the Senate confirmed me to do, with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people."
An initially-secret report for Customs and Border Patrol in 2013 found:
In many cases, the “driver was attempting to flee from the agents who intentionally put themselves into the exit path of the vehicle, thereby … creating justification for the use of deadly force.”
🧵
2/ I discuss this report at greater length on my YouTube channel and Substack
3/ "Applying even the OLC’s expansive view from its recent opinions to Operation Absolute Resolve, the Executive action clearly crosses the threshold for requiring congressional authorization."