Katie Buehler Profile picture
May 29 4 tweets 2 min read Read on X
NEW: Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito WILL NOT recuse himself from cases involving #Jan6th or Donald Trump, writing in a letter to Congress he believes a reasonable person would conclude the flag flying incidents do not meet the standards for recusal.
documentcloud.org/documents/2469…
Image
In the letter Justice Alito provides additional details about the flag-flying incidents.
1. He wasn't aware of the upside-down flag at first but then requested it be taken down, but his wife refused for several days.
documentcloud.org/documents/2469…
2. He wasn't familiar with the "Appeal to Heaven" flag's meaning in relation to the 2020 election, but he doesn't say the same about the upside-down American flag.
documentcloud.org/documents/2469…
3. His wife, who also allegedly didn't know the significance, didn't fly it to associate with any group. And that a group's use of a flag, he claims, doesn't drain it of all other meaning.
documentcloud.org/documents/2469…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Katie Buehler

Katie Buehler 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 @bykatiebuehler

Aug 11, 2023
DC District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan is on the bench. She was accompanied by what looks like two security guards. One is standing near the courtroom entrance judges use.
"Mr. Trump, like every American, has a First Amendment right to free speech, but that right is not absolute," Judge Chutkan said before diving into the disputes among parties. First issue: the scope of the order.
Judge Chutkan's first line of questioning is aimed at the government: Why wouldn't the government's desire to protect sensitive information be met by Trump's proposed order, which wouldn't cover all discovery, but just those materials specifically designated by the government?
Read 27 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!

:(