So that’s a relief anyway.
BREAKING: DOJ & Garland have rejected Mo Brooks’s request to be immunized for the insurrection. They correctly found that his actions were OUTSIDE the scope of his duties.
— Norm Eisen (#TryingTrump out now!) (@NormEisen) July 28, 2021
Called it: https://t.co/bk89cVUNem
DOJ says Mo Brooks was NOT acting in his scope of employment in his rabble-rousing 1/6 speech and thus they will not defend him against the lawsuit by Eric Swalwell. Very big development as a practical matter, and Brooks is going to be sweating it big time come his deposition,
— Harry Litman (@harrylitman) July 28, 2021
And not just Mo Brooks…
DOJ sends a clear-as-day signal that Trump would also not be shielded from these lawsuits brought by @RepSwalwell, Capitol Police officers, and others for allegedly inciting #Jan6 attack.
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) July 28, 2021
Golden words: "–or any federal employee–" pic.twitter.com/OVcdfFPUSB
Imagine what so many people in this nation have become that we have to actually have this as a ruling. https://t.co/XTEkMOGQWf
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) July 28, 2021
No need to imagine, we’ve been watching it.
Great news. As our executive director wrote previously, had DOJ decided Mo Brooks' incendiary remarks fell within the scope of his employment, the DOJ would have been defending Congress members' right to foment insurrection https://t.co/ySJ9Bj0s73 https://t.co/GANXdg2Ac5
— Project On Government Oversight (@POGOwatchdog) July 28, 2021
Comments
One response to “Not within the scope”
Brooks seems to be doing poorly in his Senate campaign. I hope he doesn’t win the primary; it’s really too much in the current environment to hope a Democrat wins the general election. I also hope Brooks gets convicted. Maybe maybe maybe they’ll be able to get to Trump as well; is THAT too much to hope?