Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDOJ will NOT defend Mo Brooks in Swalwell lawsuit
Link to tweet
Tweet text:
Andrew Feinberg
@AndrewFeinberg
NEW: @TheJusticeDept says @MoBrooks was NOT acting within the scope of his employment when he spoke at the Ellipse on 1/6.
Image
Andrew Feinberg
@AndrewFeinberg
NEW: @TheJusticeDept says @MoBrooks was NOT acting within the scope of his employment when he spoke at the Ellipse on 1/6.
Image
Mo is shit outta luck.....both House counsel & DOJ say he's on his own
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
13 replies, 1653 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (42)
ReplyReply to this post
13 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DOJ will NOT defend Mo Brooks in Swalwell lawsuit (Original Post)
Nevilledog
Jul 2021
OP
It's a big deal (Tristan Snell was the US attorney that prosecuted Trump University)
Nevilledog
Jul 2021
#4
That's right, Nevilledog. It's the scope of the decision that makes all the difference. ❤ nt
littlemissmartypants
Jul 2021
#9
Mo's main defense is that he was acting the scope and course of employment
LetMyPeopleVote
Jul 2021
#12
Walleye
(31,017 posts)1. Instigating an attack on the Capitol not within the scope of his employment. 😁
Nevilledog
(51,094 posts)2. Mo should call TFG.....I'm sure he'd help with the legal fees
MyMission
(1,850 posts)7. Or tfg will just recommend some good lawyers,
From his long list of them.
The Magistrate
(95,247 posts)3. Excellent, Ma'am
Nevilledog
(51,094 posts)4. It's a big deal (Tristan Snell was the US attorney that prosecuted Trump University)
Link to tweet
Tweet text:
Tristan Snell
@TristanSnell
This DOJ decision on Mo Brooks is a potential turning point: it opens the door wider to legal actions both civil and criminal, both governmental and private against *ALL* of the congressional co-conspirators of January 6.
6:28 PM · Jul 27, 2021
Tristan Snell
@TristanSnell
This DOJ decision on Mo Brooks is a potential turning point: it opens the door wider to legal actions both civil and criminal, both governmental and private against *ALL* of the congressional co-conspirators of January 6.
6:28 PM · Jul 27, 2021
littlemissmartypants
(22,655 posts)9. That's right, Nevilledog. It's the scope of the decision that makes all the difference. ❤ nt
summer_in_TX
(2,738 posts)11. Woot!
blogslug
(38,000 posts)5. nice
monkeyman1
(5,109 posts)6. attorneys are going to make a bundle this year !!
wonder how many are lawyering up as we speak!!!
wnylib
(21,447 posts)8. Imagine that. A government is not
obligated to defend an insurrectionist for his actions in stirring up a mob to overthrow said government.
littlemissmartypants
(22,655 posts)10. Kicked and recommended. ❤
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,176 posts)12. Mo's main defense is that he was acting the scope and course of employment
That defense is dead.
flying_wahini
(6,591 posts)13. I think I heard Mo's ass slam shut from here....