this is a bit different than The Memo, which first percolated up from the conspiracy theory outlets and then made it into the bloodstream of legacy conservative media. but there's a similar back-and-forth
-
-
certainly. the goal of the piece was much more to trace the fanning of the flames; with the information we have, we can't really say to what extent Nunes et al were involved in the sourcing of the original piece.
-
No. It's a critically important question, legally. But I respect Ross' reporting sufficiently to believe the story may have come via legit sources.
-
right, at some point "a source familiar with the investigations" was involved, but it's not clear when. we tried to make that clear; hope we succeeded
-
As
@benjaminwittes himself has written, that descriptive is more often than not a defense attorney. And particularly given Toensing's known "legal" tactics, I'd suggest defense attorney should remain default assumption. -
Particularly given that she's got one client who demonstrably can be charged w/1001, at a minimum, and another, Clovis, in unknown amounts of jeopardy, plus visibility on a third.
-
sure. whoever it was, they knew enough to say that the "name popped up on investigators’ radar." but as you say, there are a range of possibilities here, some more likely than others.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The Ross story is particularly interesting given the different legal status/representation of all 3: Papa, real lawyers, still awaiting sentencing Page, no lawyers, struggling Clovis, batshit lawyer, exposed to unknown extent
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.