BREAKING NEWS: Top Trump Fundraiser/Former Trump-Appointed RNC Official Elliott Broidy Charged with Federal Crimes; Broidy Is a Key Figure in the Proof Series Books on Trump's Bribery and Collusion with Foreigners—and Looks to Be Charged With Such Conduct

(THREAD) There is so much less to this headline than meets the eye—indeed, one could argue the story is interesting *only* in ways the headline doesn't hint at—that it's a shame Bloomberg, a great media outlet, published this in this way. Read on for more.

1/ *Everyone* knows that the next step in the Mueller probe will come after the November 6 election, as Mueller is currently foregoing any additional steps in his work because of the DOJ's recommended "60-day pre-election" rule against action on cases with political implications.

2/ *Everyone* knows that Mueller has completed or nearly completed the Obstruction portion of his investigation (indeed, might have completed it long ago), so even news that Mueller would be ready to issue findings on Obstruction sometime after November 6 would not be surprising.

3/ *Everyone* knows that Rosenstein fears for his job, and fears for Sessions' job, and fears for Mueller's job, so *no one* would be surprised to learn that Rosenstein was pressuring Mueller to release *some* sort of report shortly after November 6 in order to show his progress.

4/ *Everyone* knows that behind the scenes Trump has been pressuring the FBI/DOJ to "wrap up" their work, so—while it was not just inappropriate but possibly illegal for Trump to pressure Rosenstein during a recent plane trip—*no one* would be surprised to learn that he did that.

@LambeJerry Question for you: On Monday, Congress announces it's going to vote to impeach a federal judge on Wednesday. The president of the United States decides to issue a preemptive pardon of the judge on Tuesday. According to you, there's no problem, right, as there was no impeachment?

My thinking on this is identical to that of a law professor at Northwestern University who published his opinion in the NYT. But that wasn't mentioned in your piece. It's also odd that you believe the impeachment exception has nothing *really* to do with separation of powers.

You couldn't possibly think the impeachment exception has anything to do with separation of powers, as according to you and the small number of attorneys you cited, the impeachment exception isn't *actually* about keeping the president from interfering in the impeachment process.

Per you, the impeachment exception to the Pardon Clause of the United States Constitution is just a *narrow administrative cutout* to make sure that a President doesn't cause the Congress to have...what, have wasted their time? I'd love to see an argument for that interpretation.

I've read the documents surrounding the creation of both the Pardon Clause and the impeachment exception. The framers were explicitly concerned about the sort of situation we have encountered now—which is entirely unlike the situation in Garland. Your legal analysis is facile.

(TRUE STORY) In the weeks before the 2020 election, ex-Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne was desperately trying to get to me through an intermediary to share info about the coming election he claimed was critical.

I ignored his overtures.

Donald Trump invited him to the Oval Office.

I had messages from Byrne's rep on every social media platform I'm reachable on. I decided that his public instability was such that I wanted nothing to do with him. Incredible to think that the President of the United States—the most powerful man alive—made a different decision.

MORE/

NOTE/ What's telling about this—and what U.S. media might wonder about, now—is whether Byrne was contacting me to tell the same tale he told the president in the Oval. Seems unlikely, right? Seems like maybe Byrne is just peddling nonsense wherever he thinks he can get attention?

NOTE2/ Here's what I can tell everyone (and media): Byrne represented—via his rep—he'd been in touch with Roger Stone, and wanted to talk to journalists pre-election about the FBI/Comey. I'm sure I'm not the only one he contacted. After all, we know he contacted the White House.

THE TRUMP CARD

by an Anonymous Patriot

Bombshell My Friends💣

You probably will want to read this all.

Right now Trump is sitting on a stack of Trump cards that he's just waiting to lay down like a Royal Flush.

He has court cases still pending that will go to SCOTUS and ...

A THREAD ENTITLED: HE KNEW.

2.

3.

4.

5.

So you’d think that under Trump there would’ve been more successful filibusters than ever given Democratic opposition.

Nope.

The vast majority of cloture votes passed — the Senate already nuked the filibuster for things Republicans care about



During the Trump era, there were an historic number of cloture motions filed in the Senate: 529 of them. 466 of them got votes — 93% of them passed

Compare to Obama’s first term: only 70% passed the first half, 57% in the

Why? In 2013, Senate Dems nuked the 60 vote threshold to get past a filibuster on nominees, except for SCOTUS, but left it for legislation

But when controlling Congress and the WH, the GOP didn’t move much legislation. They got what they wanted

So when Mitch McConnell says “no no, you have to keep the filibuster for legislation” it’s because he knows that it doesn’t matter when the GOP is a majority

The filibuster isn’t a useful tool for Democratic minorities — just Republicans

This essay is brought to you by several hours of combing through cloture motions for this spreadsheet, which shows a major drop in the filibuster blocking cloture after 2013 — with one exception highlighted, which I’ll explain in a second

THIS: It's a little late, but here is the final White House Coronavirus Task Force report from the Trump administration. It features some lessons learned from the federal officials on the panel, many that speak directly to the situation in

- Georgia is back to 6th in the country for new cases in the week leading up to 1.17 (not long ago we were doing better than nearly every other state)
- 5th in the country for test positivity
- 97 percent of all counties in the state in the "red zone"

2/n

It's the recommendations that are the most interesting (we know things are bad here).

"Mask mandates work," it reads. "Any indoor space where masks cannot be worn ... must be substantially curtailed or closed."

This rec has been here before, but not so bluntly.

3/n

3/n

"This virus can be mitigated and community spread can be curtailed, but action needs to be taken before an increase in hospitalizations is seen," it continues. " it needs to be more comprehensive and longer than the summer mitigation actions."

4/n

Then, finally: "Georgia is still experiencing widespread community spread and needs to accelerate mitigation to prevent ongoing fatalities."

This final one is a message that we've seen before, too, though again, not in so direct terms.

5/n