Seth Abramson

@SethAbramson ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked May 21, 2022

Created

Sun Feb 13 20:53:22 +0000 2022

Likes

624

Retweets

107

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

36/ But *Durham’s* bizarre, unnecessary motion not only takes a different tack (casually implying there could be something suspicious going on with the lawyers in the case, of which he has no evidence) but then going into facts on that score that he needn’t have mentioned at all. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Feb. 13, 2022 Hibernated

Preceded By

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

35/ Lawyers must be cautious about raising Fifth Amendment issues for those they don’t represent, as you want to alert the court—and witness—that they might want to speak to a lawyer, but don’t want to publish your concerns widely and risk wrongly destroying someone’s reputation. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Feb. 13, 2022 Hibernated

Followed By

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

37/ And we *know* Durham didn’t need to go into the facts because he *admits* the parties already *privately resolved the issue* without court involvement, and that notice of the resolution *from the appropriate parties*—the witnesses and their lawyers, not Durham—is forthcoming. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Feb. 13, 2022 Hibernated