Tillis, Republican senator from North Carolina who is on the Judiciary Committee, is saying that he will oppose Ed Martin, Trump’s nominee for the powerful position of U.S. Attorney for D.C.. Here’s his “reasoning”:
I met with Mr. Martin. He seems like a good man. Most of my concerns related to January 6 and he built a compelling case on some of the 1,512 prosecutions that were probably key to the moment, bad decisions. But where we probably have a difference is I think anybody that reached the perimeter should have been in prison for some period of time, whether it’s 30 days or three years is debatable. But I have no tolerance for anybody who entered the building on January the 6th, and that’s probably where most of the friction was. …
I have to say that Mr. Martin did a good job of explaining how there were people that probably got caught up in it, but they made the stupid decision to come through a building that had been breached and that the police officers and others were saying, stay away. So the difference wasn’t that they should be charged. In my estimation, it’s by how much? That’s an argument I’m willing to have, but we have to be very clear that what happened on January the 6th was wrong. …
… [I]f Mr. Martin were being put forth as a U.S. Attorney for any district except the district where January 6 happened, the protest happened, I’d probably support them, but not in this district.
I think you can see why I put the word reasoning in scare quotes. Does Tillis know how our legal system works, or is supposed to work? Does he agree that in an adversarial system, even the most vicious criminals need a defense and that lawyers argue certain things as part of a defense that they don’t always even agree with? Does he understand that many many J6 defendants were not being told by police officers to “stay away” – au contraire?
Does he know anything about that day?
His vote is especially important, by the way, because there’s a deadline on the nomination which is coming soon, and if the position isn’t filled by that time then The Great and Powerful Boasberg gets to appoint someone to fill the position.
So, what’s going on with Tillis? Some possibilities:
(1) He craves attention and this is getting him quite a bit.
(2) He actually is extremely ignorant of how the legal system works and/or how J6 went down.
(3) He is virtue-signaling.
(4) He is going to capitulate at some point, but he wants something in exchange for his vote.
I see the following from Tillis’ Wiki page:
Tillis initially opposed President Donald Trump’s national emergency declaration to divert funding to a border wall but voted for it after pressure from his party.
That’s interesting.
Other interesting tidbits – which may or may not be relevant – are these two:
By the time he was 17, his family had moved 20 times, living in New Orleans and Nashville, among other places; Tillis never attended the same school in consecutive years. …
Tillis, his father, and his two brothers are all named Thomas Tillis.
A bit confusing, perhaps?
Tillis doesn’t have a law degree; he’s got a BA from the University of Maryland in technology management. Not sure why he’s on the Judiciary Committee.
There’s also this:
After the release of the Access Hollywood tape during the 2016 United States presidential election, Tillis called Trump’s comments “indefensible”. According to Politico, he “began the Trump era by negotiating with Democrats on immigration and co-authoring legislation to protect special counsel Robert Mueller” but has increasingly aligned himself with the president due to pressure from his party. While occasionally criticizing Trump’s tone, Tillis said in 2017 that he had “not deviated once from any nomination or any vote that the president happens to be supportive of” and has voted with Trump’s stated positions 90% of the time as of January 2021.
He also was against the Hegseth confirmation before he was for it.
And I assume he’s currently undergoing a bit more of that familiar “pressure from his party” – at least, I hope so.
