Jeff Clark

21.1K posts

Jeff Clark banner
Jeff Clark

Jeff Clark

@JeffClarkUS

VP Litigation @ Oversight Project; fmr. Acting OIRA Admin (OMB) & CFPB; fmr. Double DOJ Ass't Atty Gen'l; admin law expert; on GETTR + @ RealJeffClark on Truth

United States Katılım Mart 2022
10.2K Takip Edilen131.3K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Jeff Clark retweetledi
Breanna Morello
Breanna Morello@BreannaMorello·
🚨SICKENING🚨 An illegal alien was sentenced to ONLY 4 years 8 months in prison for KILLING 3 people in a horrific 8-vehicle pileup on SoCal’s 10 Freeway. Jashanpreet Singh was under the influence of drugs when he plowed a semi into slowed traffic with no attempt to stop or swerve. Pleaded guilty to 3 counts of vehicular manslaughter w/ gross negligence. He entered the U.S. illegally from India in 2022.
English
79
403
1.1K
23.8K
Jeff Clark
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS·
Watching former FBI agent Michael Feinberg on MSNOW tonight. Tomorrow, I will have more observations re this MSNOW appearance as to his attack on @DAGToddBlanche. But for now, let me observe: Of course, he has a poster of Wim Wenders behind him. Wenders is a supporter of child rapist Roman Polanski.
Jeff Clark tweet media
English
13
58
140
2.7K
Lisa
Lisa@emaq27·
@JeffClarkUS Your track record plus the fact that you’re not a slime ball swamp creature is why we love you Jeff!
English
1
0
2
130
Jeff Clark
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS·
I just can't resist observing I was in charge of defending this litigation in the federal district court in Washington, D.C. when I was running the Civil Division in 2020. Yet magically, the January 6 Committee, and Fani Willis, the mainstream media, and many others spouted for years the lie that I had no involvement or expertise in election litigation. Because all of them sought to destroy me using Alinskyite tactics of misrepresenting their target. Let me also point out that I just won a constitutional election law case last week against Adrian Fontes and Kris Mayes in Arizona federal court. My track record, even if it takes a while given lengthy litigation tails (American litigation can be quite slow), seems to be doing well despite my supposed lack of expertise. Curious, isn't it?
Abhi Kambli@AbhiKambli1984

While this is a technical jurisdictional decision it does have implications for other cases that are being litigated right now since claim channeling is a common argument raised in cases such as the challenges to RIFs. I’ll explain what claim channeling is and why it matters.

English
9
158
523
12.6K
Bill Mosler
Bill Mosler@mosler302·
@JeffClarkUS Grok states there's no proof Wilson ever worked for the Intelligence Community, & denied Wilson made any admission to that. That statement , Grok said, was an assumption by the listener.
English
6
1
2
871
Jeff Clark
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS·
This is a big one I've been holding for a while. Last week, Rick Wilson of the Lincoln Project admitted he was a member of the intelligence community. Now do you understand what the Lincoln Project is: An attempt by the intelligence community resisters to undermine the Republican Party and destroy it from within. Wilson famously goes all the way back to working on both of John McCain's campaign and he even tied himself to the Confederacy at one point. You see that play too, now, right?
English
181
1.6K
3.8K
99.8K
Debra Lee
Debra Lee@ColterKitty·
@JeffClarkUS Great to see you on Bannon 's WarRoom today, Mr. Clark. =^.^=
English
1
0
7
782
Jeff Clark retweetledi
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸@julie_kelly2·
NEW from Sens. Grassley and Johnson: Jack Smith's lead henchmen in the J6 investigation, Tom Windom, worked with NARA general counsel Gary Stern--who had already participated in the sham classified documents case against the president and had visited the Biden White house at least twice--to obtain text messages of dozens of Trump White House officials from Oct 2020 to Jan 20, 2021. After Stern produced the data, Jack Smith's team got their hands on text messages of 44 members of Congress...
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 tweet media
English
20
449
1.1K
31.1K
Jeff Clark retweetledi
Greg Price
Greg Price@greg_price11·
Jack Smith explicitly denied under oath during his House Judiciary deposition last December that he reviewed text messages from members of Congress: Q: "Did the records that you requested from the Member of Congress include the content of text messages?" Smith: "No."
Chuck Grassley@ChuckGrassley

I received records frm DOJ confirming Jack Smith's investigative team reviewed the contents of text msgs sent by 44 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Im 1 of the 44   Im alerting my colleagues who were impacted and will release the records w Sen Johnson so American ppl can see the evidence

English
237
1.5K
4.6K
534.2K
Jeff Clark
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS·
@Anita_in_Tucson sorry for any typos -- I type quickly and autocorrect sometimes hijacks what I type because none of it is AI or rote phraseology so autocorrect guesses at the wrong word.
English
2
0
6
97
Jeff Clark retweetledi
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸@julie_kelly2·
NEW: Right before the 2020 election, DC District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan halted the Postal Service's plans to shore up mail processing rules to handle massive influx of mail-in ballots. Democratic states and cities sued to stop the USPS guidance; on Sept 27, 2020, Sullivan (Clinton) entered a preliminary injunction on behalf of the Democratic litigants. (A few years later, Sullivan entered a summary judgement along the same lines.) Today, a DC appellate panel determined Sullivan had no jurisdiction over the matter. Too late to have any impact on the 2020 election...
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 tweet media
English
108
1.6K
3.8K
70.5K
Jeff Clark
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS·
This is yet another constitutional debacle foisted on us by Jack Smith and his band of un-American legal thugs.
Paul Sperry@paulsperry_

BREAKING: Newly declassified records reveal Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team unlawfully (in violation of Constitution) accessed text messages to and from the following current and former Senators and House members: 1. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) 2. Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) 3. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) 4. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) 5. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) 6. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) 7. Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.) 8. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) 9. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) 10. Senator David Perdue (R-Ga.) 11. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) 12. Senator Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) 13. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) 14. Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla.) 15. Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) 16. Senator Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) 17. Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) 18. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) 19. Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) 20. Senator Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) 21. Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) 22. Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) 23. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 24. Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) 25. Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) 26. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) 27. Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.) 28. Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) 29. Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) 30. Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) 31. Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) 32. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) 33. Rep. John Katko (R-N.Y.) 34. Rep. Joshua Gottheimer (D-N.J.) 35. Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.) 36. Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) 37. Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) 38. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) 39. Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) 40. Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) 41. Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) 42. Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) 43. Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) 44. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)

English
32
171
555
11K
Jeff Clark retweetledi
Jennifer Geoffroy
Jennifer Geoffroy@jennifergee79·
For those interested. FULL CLIP between STEVE BANNON and JEFF CLARK from BANNONS WAR ROOM on RUMBLE MONDAY 7/13/26 EVENING EDITION @JeffClarkUS FYI: I get all of Bannon's clips with his special guests from his BANNONS WAR ROOM on RUMBLE Channel. Somehow Mr. Clark's clip has yet to be posted separately. This interview can only be found on the 2nd hour of Bannons War Room of his Monday Evening edition post that I have included. x.com/jennifergee79/…
Jennifer Geoffroy@jennifergee79

BANNONS WAR ROOM | ON RUMBLE | MONDAY 7/13/26 EVENING EDITION | 2ND HOUR (no commercials) | STEVE BANNON host @Bannons_WarRoom GUESTS: Trump on massive raids in Iran BANNON COMMENTARY Mark Pullium: Anchor babies & birthright citizenship Jeff Clark: Thoughts on Chief Justice Robert's ruling of birthright citizenship. Axios story on federal ruling on Trump's illegally leaked tax returns. Todd Blanche AG confirmation hearing will be nasty. Sheila Matthews: PA withholding evidence in Trump attempted assassination. Toxicology report and evidence at crime scene. Connecticut lying about Sandy Hook. Mike Lindell rumble.com/v7cp3fi-warroo…

English
0
2
3
776
Jeff Clark
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS·
1) That's not correct. Attorneys at DOJ are authorized by statute to appear in any court in the United States. See, e.g., 28 USC 515, 516, 518. There is an appropriations statute that provides they must be members of a state bar or the DC Bar in order to be paid out of the CJS appropriation. (There is also a relevant Justice Manual provision but that can be changed at the stroke of a pen by the AG.) But that appropriation statute does not and cannot override the Constitution, intergovernmental immunity, or the absurdity of making DOJ career lawyers and political appointees reporting to the President subject to mere bar volunteers or city or state officials. That would turn the Constitution upside-down. 2) The statute is not the entirety of the law. The Constitution's limitations and parameters still must be considered. 3) Congress purporting to place Executive Branch officials that the Executive Branch does not itself agree committed ethical wrongs at the mercy of state or DC officials is unconstitutional. And this is especially true when the state and local bars are engaged in politicized Barfare weaponization, turning political and policy disputes into purported ethics disputes using vague terminology in the rules. Lawyers will sometimes say at an oral argument that opposing counsel is lying. Oftentimes, such claims are exaggerated and stem from a particular point of view. They are not the same as misrepresenting whether a client refused to provide consent to some course of conduct. Ethics laws can be misapplied and abused. Let's take DC first. It's an inferior government. There is no DC-trumps-Article II provision in the Constitution if an ethics matter is involved. Congress would exceed its power if it tried to make that the law. And as to the States, doing something similar there would turn the Supremacy Clause upside-down. The federal Article II Executive Branch is superior to the States in its sphere of operation. There is no exception to the Supremacy Clause that permits States to dictate ethics law such that it supersedes federal operations.
English
2
0
4
160
Steven Brown
Steven Brown@AttyStevenBrown·
1) The Attorneys are still members of State Bars and have to be to practice or be admitted in any Federal Court. 2) I screenshotted the entirety of 28 USC 530B, but those regulations must "assure compliance with" the statute. Insulating government attorneys from State Bar review would be violative of the statute, not assuring compliance with. Perhaps I am wrong. I do not disagree that State Bars can go overbroad, just curious how the proposal fits with the statute.
English
1
0
0
99
Steven Brown
Steven Brown@AttyStevenBrown·
I am curious how DOJ intends to have a regulation insulating government attorneys from state bar rules when Congress has mandated that they "shall be subject to" them. The definition of "attorney for the Government" includes the AG.
Steven Brown tweet media
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS

This nonsense has to end. The State and local bars are not the superior officers of or the equivalent of a school-marmish national Principal's Office that sits in supervision of two highest-ranking leaders of the Justice Department. No way. It's completely unconstitutional. DOJ has the power to put an end to this nonsense by issuing regulations preempting state/local bar weaponization. It has a proposed rule pending which, with appropriate amendments, are logical outgrowths of the proposal itself, and so could be issued in final form to put an immediate and complete stop to this. And if Congress were not asleep, it would quickly pass legislation ending this as well. If this trend continues, no future Republican lawyer is going to agree to enter the U.S. Justice Department to carry out the President's law enforcement orders as the Constitution intended. Power will instead be monopolized and moved only to the Left. The professional bar processes were never intended to be tools of that massive usurpation of Article II constitutional power. It's what Norm Eisen wants. But it's not what any rational American citizen should want. And regardless of whether Congress or DOJ act to confirm the requisite preemption of state/local ethics law, the Eleventh Circuit must reverse this abominable decision. The Framers would be shocked to learn that the real boss of Executive Branch legal power is not the singular President of the United States, but instead committees of insular coastal elite lawyers purporting to wield the meta-power of legal ethics. It's a constitutional system turned on its head to empower a group of people who should wield, at most, tiny amounts of power to instead lead the whole Executive Branch around by the nose.

English
2
0
4
3.1K
Lucero Law, PLLC
Lucero Law, PLLC@lucerolaw7·
This is of super great importance on so many levels…excellent post Jeff. I couldn’t agree more both personally and professionally since I too am a conservation MAGA litigation attorney for over 36 years.
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS

This nonsense has to end. The State and local bars are not the superior officers of or the equivalent of a school-marmish national Principal's Office that sits in supervision of two highest-ranking leaders of the Justice Department. No way. It's completely unconstitutional. DOJ has the power to put an end to this nonsense by issuing regulations preempting state/local bar weaponization. It has a proposed rule pending which, with appropriate amendments, are logical outgrowths of the proposal itself, and so could be issued in final form to put an immediate and complete stop to this. And if Congress were not asleep, it would quickly pass legislation ending this as well. If this trend continues, no future Republican lawyer is going to agree to enter the U.S. Justice Department to carry out the President's law enforcement orders as the Constitution intended. Power will instead be monopolized and moved only to the Left. The professional bar processes were never intended to be tools of that massive usurpation of Article II constitutional power. It's what Norm Eisen wants. But it's not what any rational American citizen should want. And regardless of whether Congress or DOJ act to confirm the requisite preemption of state/local ethics law, the Eleventh Circuit must reverse this abominable decision. The Framers would be shocked to learn that the real boss of Executive Branch legal power is not the singular President of the United States, but instead committees of insular coastal elite lawyers purporting to wield the meta-power of legal ethics. It's a constitutional system turned on its head to empower a group of people who should wield, at most, tiny amounts of power to instead lead the whole Executive Branch around by the nose.

English
1
2
16
564