No need to "rely on my reporting." I produced the primary source email, which clearly states that "Russian descent" is now an investigatory criterion for the Senate Intelligence Committee.
-
-
Replying to @mtracey @joelw_762 and
Have you ever coded before? It's a conjunctive criteria. Russian-descended individuals aren't being targeted.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JettGoldsmith @joelw_762 and
Yes, Russian-descended persons are explicitly being targeted in that the Senate Intel Committee has specified that "Russian descent" is among its investigatory criteria, along with engaging in "activities that related in any way to the political election process in the US"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mtracey @joelw_762 and
The conjunctive criteria clearly targets people known by or associated with Charles C. Johnson with regards to interference in the US political process. The letter explicitly targeted Charles C. Johnson, it was sent to him. I appreciate your reporting but not the editorial.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JettGoldsmith @mtracey and
Why are you refusing to accept Tracey's reporting? The email clearly states Russian "descent" is an investigative criterion. It starts with Johnson's associates. Whether it will be applied to people of Russian descent unconnected to Johnson remains to be seen.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @OnAsiaandMore @JettGoldsmith and
Please re-read the email. It makes quite clear that it's looking for information/documents on the union set of information/people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @joelw_762 @JettGoldsmith and
You miss the point. Yes, union set relevant to Johnson. But email establishes Russian descent as an investigative criterion, which could be become part of future union sets or even stand on its own. Dangerous, broad precedent.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @OnAsiaandMore @joelw_762 and
SSCI isn't the judiciary, first of all. Their investigation is a process.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JettGoldsmith @OnAsiaandMore and
SSCI isn't the judiciary but it's among the most powerful Senate committees, with subpoena power, and whose inquests can feasibly culminate in criminal charges (perjury etc.) Not drawing a precise analogy here, but Joe McCarthy wasn't "the judiciary" either.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @mtracey @OnAsiaandMore and
I do not agree with your stance, but I appreciate both your thoughts on the issue, to whatever end, and your engagement on the topic.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Always appreciate good faith engagement. Here is an additional item on the topic: https://tytnetwork.com/2017/12/29/analysis-can-the-senate-use-russian-descent-as-an-investigatory-criteria/ …
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.