@Teri_Kanefield Call me dull but I really like how boring and procedural these investigations seem. There’s just a lot of data collection and cross-referencing. And then “let’s see if he deleted his copy of these incriminating DMs.”
@Teri_Kanefield this seems to be the lesson - something Trump has said himself “If you’re innocent, you have nothing to hide.” The corollary is “if you’re not innocent and you try to hide stuff from the FBI, it’s a sure way to be found guilty of something (obstruction).”
@Teri_Kanefield I think some of the things the DOJ wants are metadata. What device were the messages sent from, what IP address, geographic location, etc.
@Teri_Kanefield
A couple of news organizations have compiled large numbers of his tweets into multi-volume book sets.
Additionally, I seem to recall that since he was using Twitter as his communication medium of record while as president a judge ruled something about his tweets being part of the public record, when they ruled that he could not block people in Twitter any longer
@Teri_Kanefield Wait. Is he trying to under-bus someone by suggesting he didn’t write those xeets himself? So DoJ needs access logs to prove it was his phone logged in, maybe. Can only get those from the source. Assuming they haven’t been deleted by a sympathetic fascist.
@Teri_Kanefield@obviousdwest Maybe it's not the tweets themselves, but the deletion of the tweets that is evidence of a crime? A crime like obstruction?
There is no reason to subpoena Trump's public tweets. The DOJ was either looking for drafts and/or DMs. To get the subpoena, the DOJ had a good idea what they were after already...because someone talked.
@Teri_Kanefield After reading the Court of Appeal's smack down of the X/bird app's attempt to overturn the non-disclosure rule, I've come to think X doesn't have very good attorneys.
Maybe it got named X because it would look weird in court cases.
Add comment