Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Dec 8 4 tweets 3 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
Reading now DC appellate court ruling that mostly upholds gag order on Trump.

One thing is very clear: This panel strongly refuted the media's description of the order as "narrow."

"The district court’s order, however, sweeps in more protected speech than is necessary."
On balance--while the Dem judges certainly take their shots at Trump--the decision is a defeat for Judge Chutkan and Jack Smith in particular.

As far as public statements re potential witnesses--Chutkan prohibited all comments on those individuals including former WH officials.

"The district court’s ban on speech that 'targets' witnesses and trial personnel reaches too far. The ordinary meaning of statements that 'target' a person is statements aimed at or directed toward a person or entity."

This ruling narrows the scope to include statements "concerning their potential participation in the investigation or in this criminal proceeding."

Noting that potential witnesses including individuals who speak critically of Trump (Bill Barr, Mark Milley, Mike Pence), the judges argue Trump has a right to fight back as long as it doesn't pertain to the trial.

"Mr. Trump has a First Amendment interest in publicly debating those individuals’ commentaries in a way that is independent of and disassociated from any role they might have in the trial. Yet the Order would proscribe such speech because it would speak about someone who is a reasonably foreseeable witness, even if Mr. Trump’s speech would have nothing to do with their witness role or the possible content of any testimony."
OMG LOL this is so embarrassing for Jack Smith.

Recall--Smith is the one who asked for a gag order prohibiting Trump from posting mean things about him.

3 Dem judges basically said: put your big boy pants on

Chutkan gag order on left.

DC appellate court version on the right.

The framework of Chutkan's order mostly remains in tact but by narrowing prohibitions on public statements regarding witnesses and eliminating Jack Smith from the order's scope, the appellate court effectively debunks claims by Smith, Chutkan, and the media that her order was narrow. Anything but.


• • •

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

Keep Current with Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 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!


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 @julie_kelly2

Dec 5
New: Jack Smith just filed a motion describing the evidence he plans to use in Trump's J6 trial in DC.

It's like reading the J6 Committee TV script:

* Historical Evidence of the Defendant’s Consistent Plan of Baselessly Claiming Election Fraud

* Historical Evidence of the Defendant’s Common Plan to Refuse to Commit to a Peaceful Transition of Power

* Evidence of the Defendant and Co-Conspirators’ Knowledge of the Unfavorable Election Results and Motive and Intent to Subvert Them

* Pre- and Post-Conspiracy Evidence That the Defendant and Co-Conspirators Suppressed Proof Their Fraud Claims Were False and Retaliated Against Officials Who Undermined Their Criminal Plans

* Pre- and Post-Conspiracy Evidence of the Defendant’s Public Attacks on Individuals, Encouragement of Violence, and Knowledge of the Foreseeable Consequences

* Post-Conspiracy Evidence of the Defendant’s Steadfast Support and Endorsement of Rioters
The motion is stunning in its level of sophistry, demagoguery, and hypocrisy.

The same DOJ that concocted the Trump-Russia election collusion hoax in 2016 to derail his candidacy/presidency now claims Trump tried to undermine the transition of power that year.
Smith cites Trump's recent comments about excessive sentences for Proud Boys and promises to pardon J6ers as evidence he supported the "riot."

Smith will use proposed pardon to impeach credibility of defense witnesses, esp anyone tied to Jan 6. Image
Read 4 tweets
Dec 3
The public is realizing that a combo of ineptness and excessive force by police on J6 prompted much of the violence.

Improper use of munitions including chemical spray resulted in "friendly fire" injuries. Here is how MPD Sergeant Jason Mastony approached the scene at 2pm:
No violence on this side of the building (west) at this point. Exterior perimeter had been breached an hour earlier; DC and Capitol police started using munitions around 1:10pm and continued despite a legit mostly peaceful crowd.

Unknown number of protesters injured like here:
This officer testified he had never been at the Capitol as an officer. (Others have said the same.) Officers continue to assault people even as another protester is clearly injured on the ground...
Read 4 tweets
Dec 2
New: To no one's surprise, Judge Chutkan, in typical hyperbolic fashion, denied Trump's motion to dismiss Jack Smith's J6 indictment on constitutional and immunity grounds.

Her "king" reference is the same language she used in her 2021 order forcing Trump to turn over records to J6 committee:
Bwahahaha - breathe -- bwahahaha ok judge Image
Nope she has not already made up her mind on the charges. Not at all!

Recall she recently denied Trump's motion to strike inflammatory language from Smith's indictment. Now we know why--she adopts them Image
Read 6 tweets
Nov 30
Trump's lawyers filed a lightly redacted (per protective order) motion yesterday again outlining the parties they believe are part of the prosecution team.

These agencies have fingerprints on the initial DOJ investigation and Jack Smith's. The redactions are...interesting: Image
Not sure what these redactions are--related to Bill Barr perhaps?

As I covered last week, (JP) Cooney and (Molly) Gaston are now on Jack Smith's team. They wrote a letter to Barr blasting him for modifying SOP for election investigations describing claims of election fraud as "conspiracy theories"
More redactions related to FBI. Recall that D'Antuono (first name Steve, not Mike) headed up Detroit FBI field office during Whitmer fednapping then promoted to WFO a few months before Jan 6.

In April 2022, FBI opened two investigations into Trump: J6 and classified docs
Read 5 tweets
Nov 15
I've seen a lot of innocent people railroaded by this DOJ/FBI but few cases as egregious as the case against Greg Yetman.

My team carefully scoured J6 surveillance and open source video to track Yetman's conduct.

He tried to help, not hurt, police.

Yetman served his country for YEARS. His FB profile bragged about being a "military police officer for the Army New Jersey National Guard." Does this sound like he was on the side of police or protesters that day? Image
All the doctored screenshots in the world (in FBI affidavit) can't distort the fact Yetman aimed a discarded can of gas (property of DC police) on protesters. He aimed ABOVE line of cops:
Read 4 tweets
Oct 31
In an attempt to help remove Donald Trump from the Colorado ballot, @SemperWry under oath detailed his alleged injuries from Jan 6

Here are photos he posted on FB on 1/7 of his injuries from the previous day.

No swollen hand. No large contusion on his head. No evidence of an attempt to gouge out his eye.

Hodges—like Fanone, Gonell, and Dunn—lied about his injuries.

He also lied that police had been “seizing guns all day” and believed protesters were better armed than cops in full riot gear.

Danny also omitted the part when his colleagues started throwing flash bangs and sting balls with rubber bullets into crowd shortly after 1pm Image
Read 4 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!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!