(Short thread) I disagree with this assessment, and suggest it comes from unrealistic expectations.
The Dem Judiciary Committee strategy appeared to be:
💠Establish out of the gate that the Mueller Report did not exonerate the president . . . (cont.)
💠March through the elements of obstruction of justice to show that the Report contains sufficient evidence that Trump committed a crime,
💠Talk about the Report’s insinuation that Congress, not a prosecutor, needs to hold a president accountable, and finally . . .
💠 End with a mention of the “I” word, and suggest that Congress is left with no other option.
Follow up questions might have helped eviscerate the GOP conspiracy theories, but ignoring the GOP grandstanding and marching through the evidence also has advantage.
It seems to me that the most effective way to disprove the conspiracy theories is to demonstrate that the Report contains evidence of Trump's crimes.
Getting pulled into a game of whack-a-lie would suck up all the time.
Mueller did refute the bias and integrity issues. It was actually the only time he really came to life.
He also said that he never hires based on political affiliation.
What? IRAC isn't flashy?
IRAC = a method of legal analysis known to law students everywhere.
Mueller did IRAC in the Report.
House Dems did IRAC today.
Link in the next tweet.
IRAC in the Mueller Report, in action:
You can follow @Teri_Kanefield.
Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.
Enjoy Threader? Sign up.
Since you’re here...
... we’re asking visitors like you to make a contribution to support this independent project. In these uncertain times, access to information is vital. Threader gets 1,000,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Your financial support will help two developers to keep working on this app. Everyone’s contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support Threader by becoming premium or by donating on PayPal. Thank you.