In my post I noted that the riskiest thing Jack Smith did was keep the Mike Pence language in there (the Justices directly questioned whether he was VP or President of Senate in those roles). This language addresses that.
Smith had to pull out ALL reference to people in govt telling Trump he was nuts. This undoubtedly makes @C_C_Krebs and Bill Barr sad, as they won't get to testify.
Here's another area where SCOTUS may get stroppy. Under a prior ruling, they said that Tweets were presumptively official.
This may be the place the indictment is most vulnerable to more fuckery by the right wingers in SCOTUS.
.@JasonMillerinDC is still going to get to testify against his liege, though.
The sad trombone you're hearing is all possibility we'll get to hear about the nutso December 18, 2020 meeting in the Oval.
Hey Donny?!?!?!
Maybe it wasn't such a good idea to throw over @RonnaMcDaniel so brutally, before she testified against you?!?!
This may be one of the most important additions. As I said, this superseding had to harmonize with efforts DC USAO is making to sustain some of the 1512 cases against crime scene people.
This detail will be the pivot point of that harmonization.
This is also an important detail: They're making the distinction between what Trump did in the Oval (= presidenting) versus what he did in his private dining room.
Moved this bc I bolloxed the threading.
They didn't keep ALL the allegations involving Mike Pence tho. As I said in my post Saturday, this is likely something the Solicitor General's office already weighed in on.
Compare this new language to what DOJ promises in a superseding indictment against a crime scene defendant, Matt Loganbill.
Karen Henderson, a Poppy Bush DC CIrcuit appointee, had focused on the Take Care clause requiring Trump to do certain things. The right wingers on SCOTUS believe that's optional for POTUSES. So the jury won't get to hear how Trump sat on his ass and let DC be attacked.
@VerretD60265 Sorry: THere are about 5 that are gone. Anything that mentions Oval or trappings of govt.
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One way to think about this is that in early August, VP and Walz did huge rallies to recruit volunteers they could plug into an already ambitious field network Biden set up.
That said, they've been able to expand on that.
Rove compares that with Trump's intended model (remember: he defunded field so he could sow Big Lie conspiracies in the courts and at counting centers instead).
If it worked (at 1), it might work like Bush's [Rove's] successful reelect.
¶3 describes what they later call a "stream-of-consciousness rant" as a "strategic choice." That's a REALLY curious term, given that Trump is accusing VP of being unable to make coherent statements.
They say this was strategic even though they twice suggest that Trump's own campaign can't keep him on message.
Here's a list (note, it doesn't mention tax cuts for billionaires among Trump's):
1) Border wall 2) Mass deportations 3) Tariffs 4) Isolation
*) No tax on tips
a) Insulin costs
b) Climate
c) Boost housing
d) CTC/EITC
e) DOJ independence
f) Reproductive rights
g) NATO
Now check out how WaPo lowers the bar for the white former President. They don't demand Trump provide policy proposals, and EVEN consider "deport millions" as one, even tho the details of that would lay out how unworkable and dangerous it is.
Here's his verdict sheet. Civil disorder, obstruction, assaulting cops w/desk drawer and sticks, destruction of govt property, deadly weapon (a tomahawk), all guilty. (The obstruction conviction will be reviewed.)