Jill Wine-Banks

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@iYamWhutIAm @POTUS That's witness tampering and obstruction. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@pamela_barone @nightrose0511 @MarkMeadows And let's hope SCOTUS doesn't void those new laws. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@AenesidemusOZ UPDATE. See https://t.co/AtqnjkrMLq — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@njtootsie @POTUS yes — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@towneetowne UPDATE: it's up to the top prosecutor in Scotland. See https://t.co/AtqnjkrMLq — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

please read the full thread! — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@dolphingitweet @MarkMeadows Great question. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

Glad to elucidate the facts. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@FactsDoMatter4 @PaulConfer @MarkMeadows I always hope one day one of the Trumpers who insults me may actually read what I say, realize it is facts, and change their opinions. Too much to hope for?? — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

UPDATE on this. Court said it wouldn't force Legislators to investigate and left it to Scotland's top prosecutor. See: This is true. Thank you for pointing out the update to this article that I RT'd. Should have checked it out first. See https://t.co/AtqnjkrMLq — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@QopBig @ReportsDaNews This is true. Thank you for pointing out the update to this article that I RT'd. Should have checked it out first. See https://t.co/AtqnjkrMLq — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@VictoriaJZ It does not. This is one of the reasons witnesses must show up and claim privilege to specific questions IF there is any possible privilege. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@JLSargent1 @lapeikis True — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@FalafelFirst @MarkMeadows You know your history and the players! — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@FalafelFirst @MarkMeadows I'll forward this to Richard and ask him to weigh in. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@TruthProf99 TY — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@donahendrickson @MarkMeadows ty — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@HarGon63 @realHirondelle @ReportsDaNews An ignorant, obnoxious, or otherwise debatable person or a part of his anatomy. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@petecornwell68 @MSNBC As @AdamKinzinger said tonight before the #Jan6thCommittee voted, @MarkMeadows committed "legal contempt and also personal contemp for Congress, the Select Cmtee, for his former colleagues and for the integrity of the doemocratic process." — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@ChrisTh74866237 @MSNBC I remember her! — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@jaybird39393 @POTUS The ppt is like the easel with posters that Liddy showed to AGMitchell in his DOJ office laying out the Watergate DNC break-in. Nixon didn't get indicted so Trump just repeated. Must indict Trump so there's not another history repeats itself. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

@Margie1110 TY — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

The powerpoint @MarkMeadows gave the #Jan6thCommittee presents an interesting similarity to #Watergate. Like #OperationGemstone that was presented to Nixon's AG laying out the Watergate DNC break-in, here the crimes of Jan 6 were laid out in the PPT and given to Trump's CofS. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

7/ Recent DC Court of Appeals decision confirms all this by ruling Trump himself has no privilege for his documents where @Potus has waived privilege. THe former president cannot keep his documents from the Committee or prevent his former aides from testifying. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

6/ 4th, @MarkMeadows himself waived EP on the topics the #Jan6thCommittee wants answers. He gave documents to Cmtee, wrote a book & appeared on Fox talking about the subjects at issue. By giving the documents, he admitted that they cover subjects that are not privileged. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

5/ 3rd, here privilege is claimed by the ex-president, not the current president. Only the current president can assert the privilege and @Potus has waived it. He heard the ex-president's arguments & decided that the documents & testimony are necessary in the national interests. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

4/ So here, even if there was a legitimate underlying privilege claim (which there isn't), it would fall because of the overwhelming national interest in learning what happened and what legislation is needed to prevent it from ever happening again. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

3/ That alone ends the issue, but there's more. 2nd, SCOTUS' #Watergate decision giving my team President Nixon's tapes also made clear that even where conversations are about policy and privileged, ExecPriv gives way to overriding national interests like those involved here. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

2/ There are many reasons why neither Bannon or Meadows has a legitimate ExecPriv claim. 1st, ExecPriv only covers convesations with the president about the job of the president. Planning a coup and overturning the results of an election are not part of the job of any president. — PolitiTweet.org

Jill Wine-Banks @JillWineBanks

1/ #Jan6thCommittee votes to hold @MarkMeadows in contempt. This is the right decision, but commentators saying that Meadows has a stronger case for ExecPriv than Bannon are wrong. Both have ZERO basis for claiming privilege. Here's why - and it's worth reading the full thread. — PolitiTweet.org