1/ I understand we can’t see the evidence, but we should be told something about all these other investigations. Nobody kept secret the fact that HRC was under investigation.
The Barr summary also acknowledged public reporting of incidences in which Trump obstructed justice.
2/ In other words, we saw it with our own eyes.
Q2: On what basis did Barr conclude Trump didn't obstruct justice?
Q3: Assuming there wasn't enough evidence to prove conspiracy or quid pro quo beyond a reasonable doubt, why all the lying to cover up contacts with Russians?
3/ We shouldn’t be left to guess what a winning presidential campaign was hiding and why.
Many of the lies were in public, but many were also in the guilty pleas and court documents. Many were actual crimes.
We need to know more about the motive for the lying.
4/ The next questions require a deep dive into the court documents.
The disclaimer from my website explains why, for the larger set of questions, I’m sticking to the more reliable facts found true in court, or arising from GJ proceedings & FBI investigations👇
5/ Links to all the documents, guilty pleas, indictments, are on my website: russia-investigation-summary.com
(I've also written summaries.)
From the Netysksho indictment we learn that Guccifer (the Russian hacker) received a request for documents from a candidate for US Congressman.
6/ We also learn that Guccifer sent the candidate stolen docs related to the person’s opponent👇 justice.gov/file/1080281/d…
Q4: Who was the candidate? Did he win?
Q5: What documents did he receive?
Q6: What did he know about Guccifer?
7/ From the Flynn Sentencing Memo we learn that Flynn provided substantial assistance with “several ongoing investigations.”👇 lawfareblog.com/document-speci…
Q7: What are these about? Again, I know we can't see evidence in ongoing investigations, but we should know something about them.
8/ From the Manafort court transcript we learn that Manafort lied about the frequency of his contacts with Kilimnik (a Russian with “ties to “Russian intelligence). cnn.com/2019/02/15/pol…
He also lied about the number of times he & Kilimnik talked about “it.”
Q8: What's “it”?
9/ You can read all about "it" on page 63. It’s the blacked out part 👇
Because “it” concerns Ukraine, it seems to be the “peace” plan whereby Putin gets to keep Crimea, and Putin gets sanctions lifted. (A clue was in the redaction mistake in Manafort’s filing)
10/ Kilimnik and Manafort talked about “it” on August 2, 2016 at a secret meeting (they left through separate doors👇)
Special Counsel alleged that Manafort and Kilimnik talked about “it” on these dates:
💠December 2016
💠January 2017
💠February 2017
💠Winter 2018 (not a typo)
11/ We get another clue on p. 67: It “goes very much to the heart of what the Special Counsel’s Office is investigating (i.e. Trump Campaign Russian "links and/or coordination")
Also during this meeting, Manafort was walking Kilimnik through something. Polling data?
12/ Q9: What was Manafort walking Kilimnik through, and why?
Q10: What is up with the $125K Manafort kept lying about?
Special Counsel made big deal over that $125K. The payment was made to Firm A working for Manafort in 2017, which performed work for Entity B, yadda yadda.
13/ Special Counsel referred to it as a "scheme" and suggested it would not be “well received” if Trump’s supposedly unpaid campaign manager was in fact getting [ ], which wasn’t reported in the “contract.”
If Trump's campaign manager was paid by Russians, we deserve to know.
14/ On page 27 of the 2-13-2019 Manafort Court transcript, the court characterized what Manafort was doing as a “problematic attempt to shield his Russian conspirator . . . "👇
Q11: What specifically were Manafort and Kilimnik conspiring to do?
15/ From a Special Counsel statement we learn that Mueller’s search warrants into the Russian hackers turned up evidence about Roger Stone. Evidence from the same search warrants also led to the indictment against the Russian hackers. politico.com/f/?id=00000168…
16/ Q12: What was Stone doing that he turned up in the Russian hacker search warrant?
Q13: Cohen went to jail for this crime; will Trump escape criminal liability?
17/ From the Cohen sentencing memo: secret negotiations for the Moscow Project happened at the same time the Russians attacked our election. documentcloud.org/documents/5453…
Q14: On what basis did the prosecutors determine there wasn't a quid pro quo? Or was this issue handed off to. . .
18/ . . . another prosecution office?
The Flynn plea agreement describes Flynn negotiating sanctions with Russians (at the direction of senior members of the Trump campaign) while Obama was president. lawfareblog.com/michael-flynn-…
Q15: Who were those campaign members?
19/ Q16: On what basis did the OSC decide there was no quid pro quo? Or was this handed to another office?
The indictment of 13 Russians says that Americans assisted the Russians. justice.gov/file/1035477/d…
Q17: Did any Americans know they were interacting with Russians?
20/ So many of the court docs looked like this👇it's obvious these questions are just the beginning.
Many of these questions can be answered by unredacting the court docs, which can happen in due time.
I'm sure I speak for many when I say I just want the whole truth.
Putin knows how to wield disinformation and he knows that the United States is divided: A large portion of the population, including the most influential voices from a major political party, want the United States to emulate his Russia.
After Russia enacted anti-homosexual legislation, Pat Buchanan said Putin was “entering a claim that Moscow is the Godly city of today" because he was stamping out western evils like easy divorce and homosexuality. buchanan.org/blog/whose-sid…
2/
British right-winger Katie Hopkins, in an article in which she was interviewed with her friend Ann Coulter, said “Putin rocks.”
Katie Hopkins then went on to praise Russia as being “untouched by the myth of multiculturalism and deranged diversity."
Um . . . this isn't the defense Trump thinks it is.
Trump published a letter he received from Mazars dated (it looks like) 2014. He then summarized the letter.
#1: What Mazars said
#2: What Trump says Mazars said
Me = 🤦♀️
Does he think nobody can or will actually read it?
Mazars said, "Trump is responsible for preparing the financial statement."
Also Mazars does not "undertake to obtain or provide any assurance that there are no material modifications that should be made . . . "
Trump posts the letter and says Mazars "strongly states that all work was performed in accordance with professional standards and that there were "no material discrepancies in the financial statements."
. . . and concluded with thoughts about how social media brings out authoritarian instincts in large swaths of people who ordinarily would not be given to authoritarian impulses.
Indicting people and having juries return "not guilty" verdicts because there isn't evidence to prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt may not accomplish what people think it will accomplish.
One reason I think social media is turning everyone into authoritarians: people don't read or think.
They see a headline and have a strong emotional reaction, which they Tweet and which then gets repeated by others, who are also not thinking . . .
1/
Political psychologists like @karen_stenner describe the authoritarian personality.
Those with an authoritarian disposition are averse to complexity. They reject nuance.
They prefer sameness and uniformity and have “cognitive limitations.”
(link in the next Tweet)
2/
See for example, "Authoritarianism is not a momentary madness,” which originally appeared in this book, an dwhich Stenner has now made available free on her website, here: ……e-4700-aaa9-743a55a9437a.filesusr.com/ugd/02ff25_370…
Timothy Snyder also talks about the danger of what he calls Internet Memes.