OK. So. I've gone through the Kasowitz and Dowd/Sekulow memos, as well as the NYT story — https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/02/us/politics/trump-lawyers-memo-mueller-subpoena.html … — and here are my thoughts ...
-
-
In the January 2018 Dowd/Sekulow letter, this line stood out: "Perhaps most notably, your office has already been given access to conversations with the President himself." What does that mean?pic.twitter.com/kvFSPEQzu8
Show this thread -
These two endnotes are to a CNN article and a WSJ editorial, respectively. I'm at a loss how lawyers decided to use these to stand for the facts they purport to stand for.pic.twitter.com/jo8gAQ0COF
Show this thread -
The whole section of the January 2018 memo laying out what happened with Flynn cites to single memo from McGahn that is dated Feb. 15 — after Flynn was fired and the day *after* Trump talked to Comey about Flynn in the Oval Office.pic.twitter.com/xsIpxuGzAM
Show this thread -
Ironically, that single memo, written about the Jan. 26-Feb. 14, 2017, period is used as evidence by Dowd/Sekulow in the same memo — about the same facts — where they attack Comey's immediately-post-meeting memoranda.pic.twitter.com/IzUA7OPzKi
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.