reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @PhilHollowayEsq

PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - October 22, 2025 at 11:53 AM
Saved - October 23, 2025 at 2:19 AM

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

This Portland Police buffoon says rioters have a 1st Amendment right to take over and shut down public roads 🤡🤡🤡🤡 I mean ferfuksake with cops like this, Portland is already lost Do they have NO educational standards for new recruits? https://t.co/YOGp4jFmPI

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss street occupancy by protesters and city responses: - Protests are currently allowed to take up street space as part of First Amendment rights. There is no immediate plan to prevent people from being in the roadway, though they are asked “to not be in the street if they can.” This stance may change, but as of now, protesters may occupy the street because it is not a major roadway and there are corridors to move traffic. If action were to be taken, an announcement would be made stating that arrests would occur for people in the street; leaving the street would not result in arrest. - Traffic management is handled with the help of protesters who guide traffic and create corridors to move vehicles around the protest. - Decision-making is on a day-to-day, minute-by-minute basis. The CMIC (incident commander) makes the on-scene decisions and relays information to the chief, while the chief oversees overall operations. The chief (Bob Day) ultimately answers to the mayor. - The hierarchy: the mayor is at the top of the city decision-making. If the mayor directs that people should not be in the street at all, the responders would carry that out in the most equitable way. - The past policy reference mentions 2020 riots and a hard line about stepping off the sidewalk leading to arrest, but the current stance is that people could be in the street without arrest, with announcements if arrests would begin. - On permits or insurance: a question is raised about whether the demonstrators have a permit or insurance (compared to a past demand for thousands of dollars for permits and insurance). The response: the individuals are not identified as Antifa, and it’s unclear who they are; the speakers have not been told who they are, and no permit/insurance status is confirmed. - There are comments about how the local government has handled the situation, with some hostile interruptions, including expressions of frustration and insults directed at authorities. The operational point retained is that arrests would be considered for those in the street only if the policy requires it, otherwise leaving the street is allowed. - The speakers emphasize that there are workers to guide traffic and that the current approach balances First Amendment rights with traffic flow, adjusting as needed on a day-to-day basis.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Is why are we allowing them to block the streets? Yes. So it's a delicate balance of people's First Amendment rights and then, like, you know, allowing cars to move through. This is not a, like, a one way situation. Like, there are other ways to get people from McAdam McAdam off and on McAdam. So as of right now, we're not gonna enact anything to, like, prevent people from being in the roadway while they're practicing their first amendment right. We are asking them to not be in the street if they can. That may change. But as of right now, they're allowed to take up the street space because they're practicing their personal right to protest. We don't wanna infringe on that right when there's not a major issue of cars coming to pick them. Because this is not a major road trip right here. And people can get around them. Okay. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 0: And they're also having their own workers to help guide traffic out of the way. Speaker 1: Okay. In the past, I know, like, in the twenty twenty riots Mhmm. People were being arrested. Or maybe it was riots before but I know in the past, there were like, I think maybe after Trump was elected in 02/2016, I attended some events that were going on, like, in the downtown area, and it was a very hard line about if you step off of the sidewalk, you will be arrested. So has the policy changed? Speaker 0: Or I don't know. So, again, it's not like people could get arrested for being in the street. We're just not gonna arrest you for being in the street right now. If we're ever gonna do that, we will make an announcement. Hey. We are going to make arrests for people who are in the street. Anyone that wants to leave the street can leave the street, and they won't be arrested. This is not again, this is not an issue. This is not a major roadway for us. Right? There are ways for me to get around. There are corridors that the protesters are providing to move traffic. So that's a leaving a lot of that issue. Speaker 1: Is that a decision that the mayor is making? Speaker 2: Or Speaker 0: who's that's a we're making this at a day by day, minute by minute basis. Speaker 1: Who's making the decision? Speaker 0: Our CMIC. So our commander of this incident right now. Right now? Speaker 1: Who is that? Speaker 0: I don't know who that is by name. I know that we Speaker 1: have CMIC. Yeah. Is it Bob Day? Or No. Speaker 0: He so the chief doesn't necessarily run every single one of these. He will have, like, a commander or captain or somebody in a position that will do that and then relay the information to him because he doesn't need to be doing all of that stuff. He's doing other things, other managing other stuff. Speaker 1: So does the CMIC answer to Bob Day then? Speaker 0: Yes. Everyone everyone at the end of the day will answer to because he's the chief of police. Okay. At the of the day, he's the one that must have understand everything. But again, just like any organization, both governmental and nongovernmental, the c a the c like, the CEO, right, in that sense, isn't making every day to day thing. They have an overarching thing, and they're making sure that the people who are under them have the ability to make decisions on their own without having to check-in with them because they believe that they're making Speaker 1: a decision. I see. Okay. So does Bob Day answer to the mayor? Yes. Yes. Okay. So, ultimately, the mayor is at the top of the hierarchy as far as all decisions here. Speaker 2: Yes. Yes. Okay. Speaker 0: Because the mayor is, like, the head of the city. Speaker 1: So if the mayor said, you need to not let people be in the street at all, you guys would carry that out and make arrests. Speaker 0: Figure out the most, like, equitable way to carry out that. Jack Speaker 2: was flying on one Speaker 1: I see. Okay. Okay. Fun. Yeah. We tried to do, like, a women's rights free speech event in Portland a couple of years ago, and we were told by city leadership that we would month old girl. We would have to purchase, like it was, like, thousands of dollars in permits and, like, insurance and all this stuff. And so do does Antifa have a permit or insurance still? Speaker 0: So I wouldn't say these people are Antifa. I don't know. They haven't told us who they are. Speaker 1: I mean, come on. I know. Speaker 3: I'm related to Bin Laden and Paul Pott. The the the government called me Timothy McJay. So And I've been to North Korea. Speaker 0: I would say that Man, our government government Speaker 2: is evil, and our local government is incompetent. This motherfucker could not get a car out of traffic, and he's too big of a bitch to do anything while I'm talking right now. About Speaker 0: the car. Speaker 2: Very confident. All we have is our Speaker 0: Can you make arrest for this orderly contract? We value you Speaker 1: and we're gonna fuck in Speaker 0: the past. Speaker 2: Fuck the police. Speaker 0: But we're not necessarily gonna do it all the time. Won't be sparing on when we're You actually go after the jaywalker. And so because they detained the jaywalker. Speaker 2: You only go after a dad bod. Speaker 0: Nothing else but jaywalking. Nothing else but jaywalking. Speaker 2: Dad bod till I was fucking 40. Speaker 1: Use the most
PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 12:01 PM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 12:56 PM

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Judge John McConnell must be recused immediately “Judge McConnell equates President Trump's first four years to the damage inflicted by the Civil War and Jim Crow laws He also compares President Trump to a "tyrant." It was improper for him to take the case given his bias

@nataliegwinters - Natalie Winters

🚨 EXC - I've unearthed footage from 2021 where the judge blocking the Trump spending freeze accuses Trump of being a "tyrant," claims racism is a "white people problem," and insists transgenders need special sentencing privileges. This is an activist not a judge. Watch ⬇️🧵

PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - January 18, 2025 at 3:18 PM
Saved - January 19, 2025 at 3:39 AM

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Speaker Johnson spills the tea Joe has been signing executive orders without knowing what he’s signing, and not remembering what he’s signed We need a thorough investigation into how this could happen It’s the biggest scandal in presidential history https://t.co/Y1Cf8itvBK

Video Transcript AI Summary
I stand by my observations regarding Joe Biden. I feel a sense of concern for him, as he seems out of touch and not in control. After becoming Speaker, I sought a meeting with him due to pressing national security issues, but his staff repeatedly denied my requests. Eventually, I went public, which led to an invitation to the White House. However, it turned out to be a setup with multiple officials present. During our conversation, I asked Biden why he paused LNG exports to Europe, which was detrimental to our allies and national security. To my shock, he genuinely did not realize he had signed the executive order to pause those exports. This left me deeply worried about who is truly running the country.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I do stand by it, and and I say this without any personal animus at all. I mean, I you know, in some ways, I actually kinda feel sorry for Joe Biden. I mean, he's in the twilight years of his life. He is not obviously, has not been in charge for some time. And I know this by personal observation, and now the whole world knows it. And it's been very, very concerning to me over the last, you know, year and a half since I've had this position. The story when you say personal observation? What what Well, I may not this is it's public now because the Wall Street Journal got it and put it on the front page. But, January a year ago, almost exactly a year ago, I had been asked I became a speaker in October 2023, and there were all sorts of big national security concerns and everything going on. And I started requesting a meeting with the president because, you know, I'm kind of old school. I'm a constitutional law guy. Speaker of the house should be able to talk to the president, especially in times of great national interest in in calamity. But they wouldn't let me meet with him, and his staff kept putting giving me excuses. This went on for, like, 8 or 9 weeks. I'm sorry, miss Speaker. He doesn't have time. What are you talking about? I'm second in line of the presidency. He has time. I need to talk to him. We had I can't say the classified parts, but we had some big big national concerns at the time that I was losing sleep over. Finally, I just went to the Hill press corps, and I said the president has not been allowed to meet with the speaker. There's a problem. So they started putting pressure on them. Long story short, they finally relented. They invited me to the White House. I show up, and I realized it's actually an ambush because it's not just me and the president. It's also Kamala Harris, Chuck Schumer, Hakim, you know, the whole the CIA director, everybody. And then so I walked in the oval and, oh, I know what this is. This is a they're gonna hotbox the speaker on Ukraine funding. That's what it was. This is, probably 3rd week of January. We sit down. We're in the midst of it and the the whole conversation, and I'm going, we don't need to have this conversation. The president reaches over just like this. We're sitting in the right next to the fireplace in the oval, and he grabs my arm, and he says, the speaker and I just need a couple of minutes together. Will you all just leave us alone? And I looked up on the faces of some of the staff standing around the wall and they're like, no. He did it. So they he called it. He's the commander in chief. So everybody leaves, and he and I are standing awkwardly in the middle of the Oval Office right over the rug by that coffee table. And I said, mister president, thanks for the moments. You know, I this is very important. I got some big national security things I need to talk you about that I heard, and I think you know, and what do we do? And but first, real quickly, mister president, can I ask you a question? I cannot answer this to from my, constituents in Louisiana. Sir, why did you pause LNG exports to Europe? Like, I don't under you know, liquefied natural gas is in great demand by our allies. Why would you do that? Because you understand we just talked about Ukraine. You understand you're fueling Vladimir Putin's war machine because they gotta get their gas from him, you know. And he looks at me stunned with this, and he said, I didn't I didn't do that. And I said, mister president, you yes, you did. It was an executive order, like, you know, 3 weeks ago. And he goes, no. I didn't do that. He's arguing with me. I said, mister president, respectfully, can I could I go out here and ask your secretary to print it out? We'll read it together. You definitely did that. And he goes, oh, you talk about natural gas. Yes, sir. He said, no. No. I you misunderstand. He said, what I did is I signed this thing to we're gonna we're gonna conduct a study on the effects of LNG. I said, no. You're not, sir. You paused it. I know. I I have the terminal, the export terminal in my state. I talked to those people this morning. You're this is doing massive damage to our economy, national security. It occurred to me, Barry, he was not lying to me. He genuinely did not know what he had signed. And I walked out of that meeting with fear and loathing because I thought, we're in serious trouble. Who is running the country? Like, I don't know who put the paper in front of him, but he didn't know.
PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - October 5, 2024 at 11:32 PM
Saved - October 6, 2024 at 10:36 PM

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

The condescending Obama crowd is saying it out loud now Basically the #NorthCarolina Appalachian hillbillies aren’t going to be able to figure out how to vote, unlike the “upscale” leftists in the rest of the state https://t.co/x9iSButzAE

PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - September 29, 2024 at 3:42 AM
Saved - October 2, 2024 at 12:38 AM

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

John Kerry says the quiet part out loud "The 1st Amendment stands as a major roadblock for us right now" The 1A and the entire Bill of Rights was designed as a “roadblock” against a tyrannical government It’s a feature, not a bug https://t.co/5fJGwrtgtd

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes dislike of social media is growing, exacerbating the problem of building consensus in democracies. Traditional arbiters of fact have been undermined, and people self-select information sources, creating a vicious cycle. Curbing social media entities to ensure accountability on facts is difficult due to the First Amendment. The speaker suggests winning the right to govern through elections to implement change. The speaker questions whether democracy can survive unregulated social media, stating democracies are deeply challenged and slow to address current issues. The speaker believes the election is about breaking the fever in the United States.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I think the the dislike of and anguish over social media is just growing and growing and growing. And as part of our problem particularly in democracies, in terms of building consensus around any issue. It's really hard to govern today. You can't you you know, there's no the referees we used to have to determine what's a fact and what isn't a fact. They're kind of, you you know, been eviscerated to a certain degree. And, people go and that people self select where they go for their news or for their information. And then you just get into a vicious cycle. So it's really really hard, much harder to build consensus today than at any time in the 45, 50 years I've been involved in this. And and, you know, there's a lot of discussion now about how you curb, those entities, in order to guarantee that you're going to have, you know, some accountability on facts, etcetera. But look, if people go to only one source and the source they go to is sick and, you know, has an agenda and they're putting out disinformation, our first amendment stands as a major block to the ability to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence. So what you need what we need is to is to win the ground, win the right to govern by hopefully having, you know, winning enough votes that you're free to be able to to, implement change. Now obviously there are some people in our country who are prepared to implement change in other ways and that's what we're saying. Really for democracy can survive unregulated social media. I think democracies are deep are very challenged right now and have not proven they can move fast enough or big enough to deal with the challenges that we are facing. And to me, that is part of what this race, this this election is all about. Will we break the fever in the United States?
PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - March 6, 2024 at 9:43 PM
Saved - March 7, 2024 at 12:18 AM

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Here’s Attorney Ashleigh Merchant testifying that #FaniWillis in fact visited the White House, and the VPOTUS prior to the GA Trump RICO indictment https://t.co/p84UKf5NAi

Video Transcript AI Summary
I requested White House access records, revealing a meeting between Ms. Willis and the Atlanta mayor with the vice president. Access to the White House is regulated, with appointments and time limits enforced. The records, known as WAVE records, are public. The meeting occurred on February 28, 2023, before any indictment. No further details were provided about the meeting. The video then takes a short break.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There's, one of the other things I did was I did open records for the White House access and we had records that, Ms. Willis and the mayor of Atlanta were at meeting with the vice president. Speaker 1: K. And so this is the access history. How how does that work? The White House keeps records of anybody who comes in and has any kind of official meeting for sure. Speaker 0: Yes. And I and my understanding is it's it's highly regulated who who can access the White House and so you have to apply in person or apply ahead of time, and then they give you a a time when you make the appointment, and they give you a time when you're allowed to be in and when you have to be out by. And they track you. And I mean, that makes sense. They don't want anybody, you know, lingering in the White House. But but they they keep that. And so these are they're called WAVE records, I believe is what they're called. And I'm not sure what that's an acronym for, but, they're publicly available. They're open records. Speaker 1: And this record that's shown on the screen shows Fonnie Willis was a VISTA with v POTUS. I presume that's vice president of the United States? Speaker 0: Yes. Yes. It was. Speaker 1: And what was the date of that back in was that February sometime of 23? Speaker 0: February 28, 2023. Speaker 1: Is that before the indictment? Speaker 0: Yes. K. Speaker 1: Any further explanation of why miss Willis was meeting with the vice president of the United States? Speaker 0: No. I know Dexter Bonds, and I believe that's the same one that, mister I think it's dick Dickinson or Dixon. The the mayor of Atlanta was also there. Speaker 1: K. I will take a short break. We've been going at this for a while. Let's take a, somewhere between 5 and 10 minute recess, and we'll be back.
PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - February 25, 2024 at 9:46 PM
Saved - February 25, 2024 at 11:33 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Trump lawyers respond to objections regarding cell phone evidence. They argue that expert testimony is not required and that the records were obtained legally. They emphasize the significance of the CSLI evidence and challenge the credibility of the opposing party's testimony. The defense claims that the evidence contradicts the witnesses' statements and suggests that they lied under oath. The document provides a link to the full response.

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

BREAKING: 🚨🚨 Trump lawyers respond to #FaniWillis' objection to the cell phone evidence offered to show Willis and Wade lied to the court

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

"The State protests that the defense is somehow not entitled to present expert testimony regarding the cell site location information (CSLI) as they allege that the defense failed to comply with this Court’s Standing Discovery Order that mandates prior notice to the opposing party of a party’s intention to introduce expert testimony and because they claim that defense has not precleared the evidence through the process of a Daubert hearing. However, neither of those preconditions apply here because the CSLI information that the defense intends to introduce through the testimony of Mittelstadt is not being offered through expert testimony and Mittelstadt will not be offering any opinion testimony"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Brutal footnote: "The State’s last-ditch claim on page 9 of its response that the defense obtained the cell phone records at issue illegally is patently frivolous. The records were obtained by valid subpoena issued to AT&T. As the State hopefully knows, defense counsel cannot apply for a search warrant and a subpoena does not require probable cause to be issued"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

"There is clear authority that cell tower evidence – linking a particular phone with a particular cell tower at a particular time – can be established through the cell phone records without any witness testifying"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

"Mittelstadt used CellHawk instead of Cellebrite. His testimony will mirror the testimony offered in Georgia courts and courts throughout the country: when one uses a cell phone either by texting, or calling/receiving a call, or by simply having the cell phone on so that it is constantly pinging, a cell tower nearby will receive and record the ping. This evidence simply shows the approximate location of the cell phones based on the nearby cell towers"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

"The prosecution will surely point out that nobody knows what was happening in the house between midnight and 3:28 a.m. on September 12, or between midnight and 5:00 a.m. on November 30. Mittelstadt does not claim to know. Neither does President Trump or any other defendant in this case. Only two people know. They are certainly the ones who should testify and say exactly what was happening on those occasions, so nobody will complain about improper speculation, or improper efforts to distort the truth, or nefarious contacts with the media"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

"it is highly significant that the State’s response did not even attempt to challenge the CSLI evidence regarding September 11-12, 2021 or November 29-30, 2021.3 The defendants’ business record CSLI evidence is admissible and Mittelstadt stands ready to testify as reflected in his affidavit"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Another brutal footnote: "The State’s response also fails to factor in that the more extensive data for the two dates, including the CellHawk generated animated map which details every cell tower hit along the route of travel, demonstrates Wade's phone traveling to and remaining at the Dogwood address (Yearti condo) geofence during times when clubs, restaurants, and the Porsche experience are most likely not even open for business. Nor does the State chose to inform the Court that this is the same data that Fulton County District Attorney's Office routinely relies upon to obtain convictions, and thus any suggestion that this data is unreliable is disingenuous at best"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

"Either party is entitled to offer evidence that contradicts the testimony of a witness The witnesses in this case – both Wade and Willis – testified that their romantic relationship did not begin until March or April of 2022 and that they had never spent the night together prior to the Spring of 2022. The evidence offered by the defense to refute this testimony – the CSLI – is admissible pursuant to § 24-6-621"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Here, they essentially allege #FaniWillis and Wade lied under oath "the CSLI records that demonstrated that Willis and Wade spent two nights together on dates that contradicted their version of events concerning the inception of their romantic relationship and in contrast to their testimony that they never spent the night together at the Hapeville condominium"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

"Given the testimony of Wade and Willis that they never spent the night together at the Hapeville condominium, the evidence – actual record evidence, not just an opinion or speculation – that proves that while talking on the phone with DA Willis, Wade drove from near his house to a location near her condo (if not exactly to her condo) at midnight, where he then remained for five hours – not once but twice in two months"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Here's the direct claim that #FaniWillis and Nathan Wade lied, more likely than not "[They] ended up at a location near or at her condominium for five hours makes more than just one fact more likely than not: (1) they spent the night together on those two occasions; and (2) their romance began before Wade was hired. One more fact is also more likely true than not: (3) neither of them testified truthfully at the hearing on February 15"

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

Here's a link to the entire document: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24440637-trump-reply-re-cell-records

Trump Reply Re Cell Records documentcloud.org
PhilHollowayEsq
Posted - February 9, 2024 at 10:33 PM
Saved - February 10, 2024 at 12:26 AM

@PhilHollowayEsq - Phil Holloway ✈️

BREAKING 🚨🚨 Trump Co-Defendant offers eyewitness proof that Fulton DA #FaniWillis lied to the court "Special Prosecutor" Wade's former law partner will testify the love affair began before Willis was sworn in as DA Willis stated it was only in 2022 that the affair began

View Full Interactive Feed