Looks like we have a debate. Jack (a good friend) disagrees with my assessment that US v Nixon stands in the way of Trump's attempt to fight a subpoena to testify in criminal case. Here's why I think Jack's wrong ... <thread> 1/https://twitter.com/jacklgoldsmith/status/991477734814732289 …
-
-
We're on the same page. That's what I'm asking the high priced legal talent in this thread, whether a quo meant to payoff election help constituted a presidential act.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.