Two more NYT journalists appear not to understand that the filing unsealed on Friday was submitted on September 5, under seal. Understanding that is a pretty basic detail to understand why John Lauro asked Tanya Chutkan to recuse when he did.
Since so many NYT journalists who've been covering Trump's criminal investigations are baffled by things called dockets. here's a PSA of what happened. Purple is DOJ, red is Trump, blue is Chutkan. What NYT keeps claiming was submitted 9/15 was originally filed 9/5.
So the motion for recusal was a RESPONSE to the motion for further protective order. When Chutkan imposes restrictions, Trump wants NYT reporters who can't read dockets to dissociate the two.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Dear @PhilipRucker @MerylKornfield: CFAA is not a "privacy" law (as you suggest in ¶6). It is the primary FEDERAL law prohibiting hacking (which you get around to describing in ¶19. Hunter's lawyers allege that Ziegler violated 3 clauses of the federal hacking law.
You apparently missed the significance of this: If Ziegler violated federal law prohibiting hacking (which is what Hunter's lawyers allege), it means DOJ is charging Hunter for owning a gun for 11 days in 2018, BUT NOT someone who criminally hacked President's son.
You know who could test Hunter's claims that Ziegler hacked Hunter?
The Washington Post!!!
I laid out here why accessing the iPhone backed up to iTunes would be a CFAA violation.
It was an apparent aberration. This report puts the admission that McCarthy is launching an impeachment inquiry EVEN THOUGH there's no evidence of wrong-doing in ¶14, but with a twist.
It ADMITS even right wingers know they have no evidence.
But then it suggests impeachment--which Big Kev says he's doing to get added subpoena power they didn't already use to subpoena 1000s of bank records--is just oversight.
Dear @MariannaReports and @amybwang: Please consider the constitutional abomination you're describing.
John Solomon propaganda is almost never worth clicking through for, but this one is remarkable for the number of clear errors and how he resumes his Russian propaganda function.
1) Why didn't SARs focusing on Devon Archer (who has been convicted on other issues) result in consequences for Hunter? 2) Why did Morgan Stanley whistleblower complaints have same effect DeutscheBank complaints about Jared and Trump have?
3) Why didn't DE charge Hunter for something no one gets charged for? 4) Why didn't corrupt allegations from Yuri Lutsenko like the ones I, John Solomon, was also implicated in a criminal investigation for result in charges?
Lots of people handicapping which of Trump's Four prosecutions will be the one to get him, if any does (a big if).
It's a category error: The two Jan6 ones and the two Jack Smith ones will have cumulative effect.
Not just on his time and $$ and energy, but wrt evidence.
We're ALREADY seeing this. Mark Meadows' testimony in DC Jan6 seems somewhat inconsistent with the testimony of witnesses who'll testify at the removal hearing Monday. Will that show Meadows fudged things in Jack Smith's grand jury?
Inclusion of Mike Roman in GA but not as a CC in DC, and the inclusion of Boris as a CC in DC but not charged in GA creates a weird kind of prisoner's dilemma.
Sidney Powell is, at least thus far, WAYYYY more exposed in GA than in DC, and wouldn't like get a pardon in any case.
It's nice being Rudy, though: You get plaudits from a former Feeb (no mention, either, of all the NY based leaks targeting Hillary in 2016), but no discussion of the racist policies Rudy implemented in NY -- another way he's the same Rudy.
Also not mentioned in 2K word story?
The name, Ruby Freeman. The only mention that she exists is in description of defamation suit.
@PhilipRucker apparently thinks Rudy's are victimless crimes.
"He is the subject of at least three defamation lawsuits by election workers."
Gary Shapley's lawyer (who only lawyered up after DOJ FINALLY made him turn over the email he had been stalling on for months) says that Hunter Biden should not have the same recourse as Trump's lawyers gave to the Russians who set Hunter up in the first place.
Remember: Toensing and DiGenova were promising access to Bill Barr and the exchange for that was ... the investigation into Hunter Biden.
@tristanleavitt If you somehow missed that your own client provided PROOF that no one had validated the laptop for 10 months after they got it, then you probably have no business asking abt import of Russia.