Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

OA 716: Jim Jordan is Not Alvin Bragg's Daddy (Patreon)

Published:
2023-03-30 06:32:40
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Downloads

Content

Liz and Andrew break down several developments in the ongoing effort to hold Trump accountable, including the back-and-forth between Jim Jordan's "Committee on Oversight" and Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg. Oh, and is Mike Pence going to testify to Jack Smith's Grand Jury? Listen and find out!

Along the way we take a deep dive into Congress's power to conduct investigations, the Tenth Amendment, how bad originalism is, and much, much more!

This is an unpaid post on Patreon.

NotesOA 708https://openargs.com/oa708-stormy-daniels-strikes-back/

Politico: Manhattan Trump grand jury set to break for a monthhttps://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/29/manhattan-trump-grand-jury-set-to-break-for-a-month-00089422

AMI non-prosecution agreementhttps://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1119501/download

Liz Wonkettehttps://www.wonkette.com/new-house-committee-to-answer-burning-questions-what-did-nancy-pelosi-coup-and-when-did-she-coup-it

Jordan 3/20 Letter to Bragghttps://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2023-03-20-jdj-bs-jc-to-bragg-re-trump-investigation.pdf

Bragg Response Letter March 23, 2023https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23720988/20230323-letter-response-from-manhattan-da.pdf

Jordan Response Letter March 25https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2023-03-25-jdj-bs-jc-to-bragg-re-subpoena-and-response.pdf

Watkins v. US, 354 U.S. 178 (1957)https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=562722361999206621

Files

Comments

Leigh Sharp

Wow. You've now sunk to the low of blocking your paying patrons on Twitter. Well, I can fix that, since you seem incapable of limiting your own behaviour. No longer a paying patron. Turns out those slurs about lawyers have some truth to them, huh, Andrew?

Opening Arguments

I don’t know what you’re talking about, but I will say two things: 1) I have not blocked, deleted, or edited a single comment here on Patreon. Not this one. Not obvious trolls. Nothing. 2) The Twitter feed is managed in accordance with normal business practices. We block trolls. I don’t know what you did or even if you’re blocked, but if you are, that’s why. If you don’t like the policy of blocking abusive behavior, I’m sure you’re welcome over at Truth.Social.

Apprentice57

Wow, I'm coming across this almost a year later, and I had been unaware that Torrez (or whoever wrote the above on behalf of him/OA LLC) actually went public (outside of court filings) to imply that they only blocked abusive behavior/trolls. It is appalling they implied this listener would fit in better with TruthSocial, a truly hate filled place. (NB, Torrez does not currently control this account and so he can't effectively respond) #1 is accurate as far as I can tell. #2 does not square with the 3rd party reports that the OA twitter account responded to a supermajority of critical tweets with blocks. That includes blocking abuse/trolls (laudable!) and polite/constructive pushback (bad!). There was lots of *both*, and the OA twitter account did not distinguish between the two. There were even multiple people that reported their only interaction with the OA twitter account was liking a critical tweet, yet they were blocked too. See the thread "I got blocked on Twitter. And it made me question something about myself" on the OpenArgs subreddit. Shame on Torrez for approving of that policy and of this message in specific. Utter buffoonery.

Leigh Sharp

Some people never learn that when you hire PR scumbags to manage your image, they just make you look like a scumbag too.