,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
BREAKING: Papadopoulos says his congressional testimony has leaked, which means whether or not the recent Epoch Times story is true—it quotes Papadopoulos as saying he was asked to wear a wire—at a minimum The Epoch Times is correct in claiming Papadopoulos' testimony has leaked.
2/ I've not yet linked to the Epoch Times story, not because the outlet fails bias/accuracy checks from watchdogs (it doesn't) but because it's odd they'd be the only outlet with Papadopoulos' Congressional testimony.
But now Papadopoulos himself admits his testimony has leaked.
But now Papadopoulos himself admits his testimony has leaked.
3/ The other concern with the Epoch Times story—and the outlet is, to be clear, rated as a "center-right" media outlet, not a progressive news outlet—is that it is entirely based on Papadopoulos' in-some-cases-wild claims, though we should note that Papadopoulos *was* under oath.
4/ Anyway, we don't know who leaked the testimony, and we certainly don't know how much of what Papadopoulos has said is true, so I'm not doing a longer, substantive thread at this point. But I've marked this story (in my head) in the event it breaks soon in other media outlets.
5/ For the record—and as the BBC (below) has noted regarding my writing on this—I told the BBC that Papadopoulos "may" have worn a wire (*may*) based on the language of court filings in his case. Certain folks skewered me for even noting the *possibility*. bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05…
6/ If in fact TET does have Papadopoulos' leaked Congressional testimony—and if Papadopoulos was telling the truth when he said the FBI asked him to wear a wire—I admit I'd feel vindicated as a legal professional and former investigator for having rightly noted the *possibility*.
7/ My position on Papadopoulos has remained firm, based on years of defendant and witness interviews:
1. The majority of the *facts* he offers are *broadly* true.
2. He's a serial exaggerator.
3. He's a serial minimizer of his own wrongdoing.
4. His theorizing/speculation is BS.
1. The majority of the *facts* he offers are *broadly* true.
2. He's a serial exaggerator.
3. He's a serial minimizer of his own wrongdoing.
4. His theorizing/speculation is BS.
8/ What I mean: if Papadopoulos says he met with a person, or got an email, at a given time/place, the *majority* of the time (but not all the time) he will be telling the truth as he understands it. But everything he says will include exaggeration, minimizing, and BS theorizing.
9/ So *if*—e.g.—we find he told Congress he was asked to wear a wire, chances are he *was*. But his description of the event will *exaggerate* everyone's words and actions, he'll bend the truth as to his *own* words/actions, and his theorizing on the event will be pure nonsense.
