Many conservatives now accept with bored acquiescence the near certainty that Trump, if elected, will dismiss both federal indictments against himself. Yet it would be an abuse far greater than the Saturday Night Massacre that once shocked the nation...
1/6
In Oct 1973, Nixon fired AG Elliot Richardson & then Dep AG Wm Ruckelshaus for refusing to fire Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox, who was subpoenaing Nixon’s White House tapes. The firings galvanized bipartisan support for impeachment proceedings ...
/2
... which began 10 days later. Quaint though it may now seem, US District Judge Gerhard Gesell even ruled, later on, that the Cox’s dismissal had been illegal. ...
/3
... Yet the SCOTUS majority in Trump v US contemptuously chided the bipartisan lower courts for trying to let justice be done before Trump has a chance to abuse power to derail it. They even purported to be acting expeditiously ...
/4
... though we are, right now, pointlessly counting 32 more days off the calendar for SCOTUS’s ruling to become final, because the court declined to make it immediate. (The pause permits the losing party to seek rehearing—inconceivable here as the Court well knows.) ...
/4
... Is the president now above the law? Half-heartedly, the majority claims (s)he is not—with asterisks galore. They say the dissents are “fear-mongering” with “extreme hypotheticals”—which they tellingly don’t deign to refute. ...
/5
... Justice Thomas disdains that tack. He quips that the once-revered notion has been largely meaningless all along. Immunity from prosecution for official acts *is* the law, he writes, archly. Silly Nixon, silly us, silly forefathers for imagining otherwise.
/6-end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In seeking a fed court order to stop fed agents from “destroying or altering evidence” re the Pretti shooting, granted last night by a Trump-appointed judge, MN’s investigatory chief said feds blocked his inquiry for 1st time in his 20+ yrs—even after he got a search warrant to inspect the public space.
1/5
MN’s brief asserts that federal agents left the scene several hrs after the shooting, “allowing the perimeter to collapse & potentially spoiling evidence,” a “sharp departure from normal best practices” that may’ve “directly led to the destruction of evidence.” 2/5
Here’s the declaration of Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) superintendent Drew Evans.
memo announcing new policy shown only to select DHS officials, shared with some employees who were then told to read it and return it and not to take notes.
memo summarized here in whistleblower letter. allegedly issued on may 12 by acting ICE director Todd Lyons. documentcloud.org/documents/2649…
Accused J6 pipebomber Brian Cole is claiming that he is entitled to release due to govt’s failure to obtain within the allotted time period either a proper grand jury indictment or a judge’s probable cause finding after a “preliminary hearing.” Odd situation. ...
1/10
Under Federal Rules, absent defense consent or “extraordinary circumstances,” you can’t detain someone > 14 days without a finding of probable cause, either by indictment or public preliminary hearing. Prosecutors prefer indictments because they’re secret. ...
/2
Cole has been in custody since 12/4 on a criminal complaint. His initial appearance was 12/5. The mag judge set a detention hearing for 12/15, but didn’t mention a preliminary hearing. Seems like everyone assumed the govt would indict Cole by 12/15—but it didn’t. ...
/3
Re USA v Abrego Garcia: A quick summary of what Judge Crenshaw’s newly unsealed order from 12/3 shows & means: He reviewed ~3,000 govt documents in chambers. Most were irrelevant, but he ordered a few dozen key ones turned over to defense. ... 1/7 storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
US Atty McGuire had previously sworn that he alone decided to indict Abrego Garcia. But emails show, per Crenshaw, that @DAGToddBlanche's Office told McGuire that indicting was a “top priority”; they wanted it “sooner rather than later”; & they even oversaw its content. ... 2/7
... Abrego’s vindictiveness claim hinges on timing. For 3 years the govt took no steps to charge him for his 11/30/22 traffic stop. It sent him to CECOT on 3/15/25 &, on 4/1/25, closed his arrest file. ...
3/7
Judge Crenshaw wants to make public his 12/3 ruling discussing the key role Dep AG Todd Blanche’s office played in deciding to prosecute Abrego Garcia. But Crenshaw is giving govt 'til 12/30 to appeal his rulings rejecting govt's atty-client & other privilege claims ... 1/4
Due to a redacting error in a defense brief, we already know that Crenshaw’s 12/3 ruling, still under seal, concluded that Blanche’s associate, Aakash Singh, played “a leading role” in deciding to prosecute Abrego. ... 2/4
In an effort to fend off Abrego’s vindictive prosecution claims, McGuire claimed he alone made the decision, and he was untainted by the vindictive motives attributable to Trump/Blanche. (Just like Halligan claiming that she, not Trump, decided to pursue Comey & James.) ...
3/4
In sealed order issued 12/3, Judge Crenshaw found that @DAGToddBlanche's deputy, Aakash Singh, played a “leading role in the govt’s decision to prosecute” Abrego Garcia. Abrego’s attys’ failed to redact that language in a brief, correcting the error shortly thereafter... 1/2
... The DAG office’s role, Abrego’s attys argue, conflicts with multiple assertions from US Atty McBride, who initially claimed that the Office of DAG was "not involved.” Later, when DAG's role emerged, McGuire said said it was just “appropriate oversight.” ...
/2