Thread by @SethAbramson

(THREAD) This open thread provides live updates on former special counsel Bob Mueller's Congressional testimony before the House Judiciary Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. I hope you will retweet this thread for any you think may be interested.

1/ After Rep. Nadler (D-NY) summarized the report in a few sentences, Rep. Collins (R-GA) deliberately and repeatedly mischaracterized its findings and concluded by saying falsely, "These are the facts of the report." They weren't—and he knew they weren't. A bad sign for the GOP.

2/ Mueller begins by saying he decided early on that he had to move expeditiously as well as fairly. He is already beginning his defense of closing up his office (in the view of many) "early" given still-open cases and subpoenas for testimony and documents that remain unanswered.

3/ Mueller underscores that he DIDN'T consider "collusion"—he underscores he only determined whether there was ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CHARGE, meaning that when he said something was "not established," it only means there was insufficient evidence to CHARGE someone with a given crime.

4/ Mueller says his testimony is curtailed by ongoing cases (though we don't know what they are) and because DOJ has told him he can't cover certain things (which they had no authority to do). He says—annoying the GOP—he cannot address why the investigation was initiated in 2016.

5/ Mueller says he will not summarize his report with new words, meaning he is going to make Democrats' and Republicans' questions include the language of his report: he will not re-summarize anything on-site and in an impromptu way.

6/ Mueller says the report "does not" find "no obstruction" nor does it "exonerate" Trump.

7/ Mueller says he proceeded on obstruction without a prosecutorial judgment "only after" taking into account the OLC opinion saying that he *couldn't indict* Trump.

8/ Mueller: the president "was not exculpated for the acts that he committed."

9/ I will say that Mueller seems a little... shaky... particularly the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence could really hammer him this afternoon with some strong cross-examination on Volume 1 of the two-volume report, and I do wonder now how well he would handle it.

10/ Mueller is *very* willing to give one-word answers as necessary, which I can say as a former trial lawyer is going to make for *much better soundbites* for the Democrats. They have to like this development a *great* deal.

11/ Remember that this three-hour hearing focuses almost exclusively on Volume 2 of the report (the one focused on obstruction).

12/ The GOP is trying to establish "collusion" and "conspiracy" are synonymous. They are not. Not in any way. Mueller disagrees, as he should.

13/ Rep. Collins (R-GA) is going aggressive from the outset. Not a good strategy and won't be a good look. Mueller asks to be directed to a page of his report, and Collins is hassling him in a way that doesn't look good.

14/ Asked if other countries were involved in election interference besides Russia (and they were: Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Israel, for instance) Mueller says he can't comment, which I think many will take as a confirmation that counterintelligence is still looking at those issues.

15/ Collusion is *not* synonymous with conspiracy and that's a *crucial* point. Collusion can undergird crimes besides conspiracy. Mueller just said under oath they were *not synonymous*. The GOP can try to badger him on that but the Democrats better keep him to his first answer.

16/ Questioners are going to have to speak loudly and move slowly with Mueller. Badgering him isn't going to work for a reason we didn't realize before 10 minutes ago: Mueller has some slight hearing problems and is uncomfortable—if clear-spoken—as a witness. This is a surprise.

17/ Oddly, Mueller being a bit of a bumbler as a witness is going to make it harder for the GOP to paint him as a villain. He... *really* doesn't come off that way. Cutting him off/yelling at him isn't going to make for good TV. That said, I could wish he were a stronger witness.

18/ The GOP just accused Mueller of "not following" the DOJ regulations by not reaching a decision on obstruction and (if he was not going to do that) writing *any* report on obstruction. "[Vol. 2] was written in violation of every DOJ principle," the GOP says, which is...insane.

19/ This is the stiffest Congressional hearing I've ever seen. *Everyone* is *very* tight in a way that is obvious and hard to watch. All questions feel like historic declarations, while Mueller's answers sound hesitant and frail. It all makes for a *very uncomfortable* viewing.

20/ There are going to be logistical issues throughout the day. Members of Congress are moving too quickly, Mueller is struggling to get to the parts of the report they're quoting fast enough. No one will give Mueller time for anything but a "yes" or "no"—no way to run a hearing.

21/ It's *so* bizarre that the GOP is attacking Mueller for not making a conventional prosecutorial judgment on obstruction because look, folks, *if he had*, he would have recommended 10 indictments for obstruction and *everyone in America knows that*. So what's their game, here?

22/ A friend just texted me saying, "the rage [from the GOP] on [against] Mueller is PALPABLE." He is correct.

23/ Wow... the GOP is hassling Mueller for *not* (*not*) using the phrase "impeachable conduct" throughout his report. What? That's a pretty muddled attack.

24/ So much of this is just going to be Democrats reading from Vol. 2 and asking Mueller to confirm they read it correctly and him saying either "yes" or "I'd refer you to the language of the report." But I'll say: Mueller is willing to give an answer that makes Trump look bad.

25/ Besides Mueller, everyone is speaking like they're (poorly) reading lines from a summer blockbuster movie.

26/ Congress should make these hearings much longer if agreeing to make them only two or three hours long is going to leave them this tense and hurried. It's ridiculous to run a hearing in this way; it's bad television and it's bad government.

27/ Rep. Chabot (R) is trying to work through the complicated Fusion GPS/Prevezon fact pattern, and Mueller isn't going to touch it (and I'm not sure he has much familiarity with it). He says it's outside his purview. The GOP isn't going to like that; this is a big area for them.

28/ One thing Rep. Chabot (R) is doing very well is... *speaking like a normal human being*. Slow, steady, calm. The Democrats *need to start doing this*.

29/ Hank Johnson (D) *always* speaks slowly, so he is necessarily going to do much better than his fast-speaking Democratic colleagues. Democrats: *speak slower and at a normal volume*.

30/ Democrats should take a page from Johnson. With *this witness particularly*, you need to speak slowly and clearly and calmly and have each question include just one fairly simple fact. (That's not a terrible rule for legal examinations generally, frankly.)

31/ One thing the Democrats did well is that for *any* question they think Mueller might answer with, "I refer you to my report," they have prepared how to ask the question should they get exactly that response from Mueller. That was smart of them. Good preparation on that score.

32/ Oh boy. Louis Gohmert (R). This guy is a loon. I'm sorry, he just is. There's something wrong with him and his questioning is going to be deeply disrespectful.

33/ Gohmert says Comey and Mueller were *good* friends. Mueller demurs, saying that they were "business associates" and "friends."

34/ Ted Deutsch (D) is speaking slowly, clearly, and at a normal volume. Again—this is such a better and cleaner way of taking a witness through a series of events. Particularly this witness, who may have some hearing problems and is a little unsteady in speaking/working quickly.

35/ I'm not focusing too much on the content of the questions because (a) the Democrats are literally just taking Mueller through the report verbatim and (b) the Republicans are unsuccessfully trying to get Mueller to talk about nonsense that's not in (or relevant to) his report.

36/ The Democrats are better prepared for—and have the upper hand in—this type of hearing. The GOP wants to yell about subjects that aren't for this hearing, or mischaracterize the topic of the hearing. The one problem is Democrats aren't contradicting their mischaracterizations.

37/ If and when Republicans mischaracterize the Mueller Report (which every GOP questioner has done so far, repeatedly), the subsequent Democratic questioner needs to take at least 5 to 10 seconds of their time to simply *correct the record* before moving on to their question(s).

38/ Mueller says it's "not in his purview" to determine how much of his report to release to the public.

Hmm.

39/ Mueller said that he did not write his report with the understanding or expectation it would be released publicly (meaning, he took no position on that in writing it).

40/ I can't quite track Mueller's reasons for answering certain questions directly and then directing questioners to his report in response to *other* questions. I can't see a pattern. Very unusual for a witness before Congress. Not good/bad per se, just... odd and unpredictable.

41/ Oh good, Jim Jordan (R). Another unwell, angry person who will treat Mueller disrespectfully.

42/ So we now will have a five-minute interlude in which Jim Jordan (R) spins (via monologue) a complex, thoroughly insane deep-state conspiracy theory to basically no one. Mueller can take a breather.

43/ Papadopoulos's lies *kept the FBI from arresting Mifsud*—per *the FBI*. And Jordan *knows it*. He's pretending they didn't charge Mifsud for a nefarious reason. No: Trump adviser Papadopoulos's lies *let Mifsud escape the country*. The FBI made this *very* clear *in filings*.

44/ Jordan's questioning was *particularly* insidious because in the sentencing materials in (Trump adviser) George Papadopoulos's case the special counsel's office made *crystal clear* that one reason Papadopoulos had to go to prison is his lies helped Mifsud escape questioning.

45/ The reality: Mueller doesn't know the case as well as one would like, so (in the case of Jordan) Mueller let Jordan mislead the country on a key point and not only didn't correct him but—to be candid—it's not clear he could have *quickly* marshaled the facts to correct him.

NOTE/ I'm receiving many requests from int'l media, as I'm writing, to do interviews. I appreciate the invites but if you're media and reading this please know I'm going to be here—discussing events in this forum, to this audience—rather than leaving for any media availabilities.

46/ We're on break. My summary right now: I'd say that Democrats are getting better as the hearing goes on—the questions are clearer, calmer, and more effective, even as the GOP is embarrassing themselves with misleading statements, unprompted anger, and irrelevant fact-patterns.

47/ Right now every member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence should be at least aware enough of how Mueller is presenting as a witness to alter their questioning strategy. You *have* to know and understand your witness (demeanor and all) to question him/her.

48/ (Incidentally, to give a sense of the *level* of international interest in this hearing, in the last 300 seconds I've received queries from media in Denmark, Germany, and Pakistan. I can't even imagine what those more invested/interested in media availabilities are getting.)

49/ This *isn't* the best forum or framework to "educate" people on a complex report. Let's just accept that. Democrats are gamely trying, and are sometimes succeeding, in doing so, but again, this is a tough forum and a tough medium with/in which to adopt a pedagogical approach.

50/ The questioners using the in-room monitor to help Mueller see the excerpts they're reading and give TV something to throw up on-screen have a *huge* advantage over their colleagues. Really only the Democrats—except Johnson—are doing this. And again it's really a helpful tool.

51/ Matt Gaetz (R) is speaking. He's publicly said he's going to try to use this hearing to "help reelect Donald Trump." So feel free to go get a snack while he's speaking. He's just going to cover some *crazy* GOP conspiracy theories irrelevant to today's very important hearing.

52/ There is zero—*zero*—*zero*—evidence that former MI6 Russian desk chief Christopher Steele was working for the Russians. *Zero*—*zero*. The very suggestion is deeply offensive and it's pretty sick that Matt Gaetz (R) is splattering this nonsense across our television sets.

53/ Wow. Jefferies (D) just asked whether trying to get the person investigating you fired is obstruction of justice and Mueller... paused. Struggled. You could see he was trying to avoid having to say "yes." He ultimately referred Jefferies to his report. Close call for the GOP.

54/ Jeffries (D) [sorry for misspelling in prior tweet] is doing a great job of running Mueller through the elements of the offense of obstruction with respect to a particular event. The problem is that Jeffries has too little time to conduct his questioning.

I hate this format.

55/ Democrats have a 3-part mantra they're repeating at the conclusion of some of their questionings—one of whose parts is "no one is above the law"—and frankly, given how bewildering this hearing is for any lay observer, it probably is helpful to remind folks of what's at stake.

56/ The other parts of the Democrats' three-part mantra: "anyone else who engaged in this conduct would have been charged with obstruction of justice" and "we're going to continue to investigate this." Both reasonable and important points to hammer home with the average observer.

57/ Buck (R) is bizarrely arguing that crimes the feds already charged (and that were pleaded to) weren't in fact crimes, for instance the crime former Trump NSA Michael Flynn was charged with and pleaded guilty to.

58/ Mueller makes *crystal clear* the OLC opinion removed a "tool" from him—indictment—and that *that* was the reason he issued no charging recommendation on obstruction. *Everyone in this room knows* Mueller *would* have charged Trump if he could have. There's no doubt on that.

59/ What Congressional Democrats are doing today—and very clearly—is laying out the most egregious course of obstruction of justice by a sitting president in the history of the United States.

That's inarguable—as is the fact that obstruction of justice is an impeachable offense.

60/ The Democrats have established—with Mueller's agreement—a timeline in which the President of the United States *repeatedly* and *brazenly* attempts to shut down, via intermediaries, a federal criminal investigation of himself and his closest associates. Again—this is *clear*.

61/ This hearing is so rushed that I'd wager the average length of a Mueller response in this hearing is <10 words.

62/ Biggs (R) just shut down an attempt by Mueller's deputy to answer a question, as he (Biggs) says the deputy wasn't sworn in (and therefore he doesn't wish to speak to or question him).

63/ Former Democratic presidential candidate Eric Swalwell (D-CA) now asking questions.

64/ Swalwell (D) is focusing on a letter signed by 1,000+ former federal prosecutors of *both parties*. Swalwell asks if Mueller would agree with those prosecutors that any other person would've been charged with obstruction here. Mueller says—oddly—"they have a different case."

65/ Swalwell (D) gave his remaining time to Lieu (D) because Swalwell is going to ask questions later, as part of his service on HPSCI. Lieu (wisely) at least *tried* to get Mueller to read from his report. He *almost* succeeded, and then Mueller demurred. Not clear why, frankly.

66/ BREAKING NEWS: Mueller Says He Didn't Indict Trump on Obstruction Due to OLC Opinion, in Response to Questioning By Ted Lieu (D-CA)

67/ Mueller will have to clean up the answer he just gave. I suspect he'll say he didn't mean it. But it *is* what he said: Lieu got him to say the special counsel's office "didn't indict [Trump on obstruction] because of" the OLC opinion—implying that he *would have*, otherwise.

68/ PLEASE RT, as this is the only part of the hearing that matters so far (direct quotes):

LIEU (D-CA): "The reason, again, that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?

MUELLER: That is correct.

69/ Media *better* have caught that Lieu-Mueller exchange. It is the biggest news—possibly in the world—so far today. I'm not exaggerating.

70/ Raskin (D) is now focusing on Cohen saying that Trump directed him to commit crimes. Which he did say, and which Trump (per Cohen) did do.

71/ Lesko (R) is now trying to get Mueller to change his testimony re: what he told Lieu (see last few tweets). I knew this would happen. Here we go. This is a big moment.

72/ Lesko's questioning is undercut by her calling Mueller "Mr. Miller."

73/ Boy, if the GOP fails to clean this up, @tedlieu just asked (and got the answer he wanted) to the biggest public Congressional question of this century.

@tedlieu 74/ I think the GOP is badly wrong-footed now. Lesko is visibly stumbling and struggling. Certainly, GOP staffers and observers know that they may have just lost the ballgame in terms of this particular hearing.

@tedlieu 75/ The pressing problem for the GOP right now: in order to remedy Robert Mueller's answer to Ted Lieu, they're going to have to *keep emphasizing what he said*. And it's *not clear* they'll be able to get Mueller to retract his testimony. A huge risk for Republicans now.

@tedlieu 76/ So I think... the Democrats just "won" this hearing? Thousands have already retweeted my capture of the Lieu-Mueller exchange (Tweet #68), and media will pick it up soon. It will be *the* moment of this whole morning, and it is now a historical moment for the U.S., I believe.

@tedlieu 77/ Jayapal (D) is now focusing very effectively on former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort's lies to the special counsel's office, and the support that Manafort received (per the report) from agents of the president in how he comported himself in so lying to law enforcement.

@tedlieu 78/ Reschenthaler (R) is implying the Mueller Report is un-American.

Good luck with that, Congressman.

@tedlieu 79/ Reschenthaler (R) says the witnesses referenced in the Mueller Report should have had a chance to contest how they were described in the report. Uh... what? This is some nonsense questioning right here.

@tedlieu 80/ Demings (D) is asking questions. She gets Mueller to say that there was "a spectrum of witnesses" who lied to federal law enforcement, some who simply "aren't telling the full truth" and some who were "outright liars." He admits this "limit[ed]" the evidence he could access.

@tedlieu 81/ BREAKING NEWS: Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller Tells Demings (D) That Lies by Trump-Connected Witnesses "Impeded" His Criminal Investigation

@tedlieu 82/ BREAKING NEWS: Mueller tells Correa (D) he "doesn't disagree" that if a hostile foreign nation knows a president has lied and that fact isn't publicly known, that hostile power can use that information to "blackmail" the President of the United States. Wow—another big moment.

@tedlieu 83/ The moment that Robert Mueller said to Ted Lieu (D-CA) that he would have indicted Trump but for the OLC opinion is the very moment that right-wingers on Twitter started going *crazy* about this hearing. They're enraged and—I think—a bit terrified. They didn't see it coming.

@tedlieu 84/ So the Republicans haven't cleaned up the Lieu-Mueller exchange. Which makes me think they're not going to—as doing so would call more attention to the exchange. Not so sure that's a good strategy: the exchange will lead domestic and international news today.

Unquestionably.

@tedlieu 85/ Right now Cline (R) is saying that because Mueller attorney Weissmann once lost a case, he is discredited. Maybe the stupidest question asked so far (or statement made so far) this morning, and that's really saying something.

@tedlieu 86/ Scanlon (D) is asking about WikiLeaks; I think she may be the first or one of the first Democrats to do so (I'd have to check, but that's my recollection).

@tedlieu 87/ Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) of CNN has picked up a key moment during Republican questioning:

https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1154038990003036161

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 88/ Steube (R) is falsely stating that Mueller interviewed to be AG (i.e. tried to get the job). He's quoting Trump—a Trump lie.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 89/ Mueller sets Steube (R) straight and says clearly that he never applied for or interviewed for the AG job, despite Trump's claims.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 90/ Mueller declines to say that a president can fire a special counsel "for any reason" (i.e., even without a reason).

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 91/ Garcia (D) is asking about Roger Stone (a pending case). Mueller doesn't want to touch the issue because the case is pending.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 92/ Armstrong (R) returns to the subject of FBI agent Peter Strzok's firing. It's an odd topic for the GOP to harp on, as it underscores that Robert Mueller got rid of Strzok as soon as he found out about his (Strzok's) texts exhibiting anti-Trump animus.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 93/ GOP claims that Mueller's team included folks who disliked Trump and/or had some tie to Clinton don't really connect to anything because there's no evidence the investigation wasn't conducted with integrity *and* Mueller said he's *never* asked employees about their politics.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 94/ Mueller tells Armstrong (R) that 14 of his 19 attorneys were simply FBI transfers and not new hires. Armstrong is now monologuing on the insane conspiracy theory that Mueller's team was rife with secret Clinton associates conspiring against the President of the United States.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 95/ Mueller tells Neguse (D) he won't say if Trump Jr. ever invoked the Fifth Amendment.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 96/ Neguse (D) does a great job establishing that Trump directed the false statements made by his family and team regarding the June 9, 2016 meeting with known Kremlin agents at his house (Trump Tower).

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 97/ Johnson (R) is now monologing on how much Trump cooperated with the Trump-Russia investigation. Everything Johnson is saying is untrue.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 98/ By volume, the largest number of lies told by any Republican questioner is Johnson (R). That's an ignominious title.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 99/ Fifteen minutes of questioning left in *this* session, per Nadler (D). The intelligence committee comes next, in about an hour.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 100/ The final Judiciary Democrats are now asking questions in slightly abbreviated segments. We're not likely to see too much come from this (the current questioner, Stanton, is just running through Mueller's sterling record of public service at the pleasure of GOP presidents).

@tedlieu @joshscampbell BREAK/ Taking a break before the intel hearing in 40 minutes. Will note a) Stanton (D) said he sees "substantial evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors" and thinks Congress must act, b) Dean (D) establishes Mueller *may* have made an indictment decision if Barr had told him to.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell NOTE/ One thing that will go without comment about today's hearing is Mueller—more than any witness you'll ever see before Congress—was able to decline to answer any question for any reason. There was no time to *insist* on answers nor—really—did anyone try to do so at any point.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING GRADES/

Democrats: B+.
Adequately laid out a mountain of obstruction evidence neither the GOP nor Mueller rebutted.

Republicans: C-.
Republicans didn't contest the evidence—they just angrily attacked the messengers and raised irrelevant topics.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell I hope everyone will RETWEET this exchange between Mueller and a Republican, as it is—along with the Lieu-Mueller exchange—one of the most important parts of the hearing (direct quote):

BUCK (R-CO): Could you charge the President with a crime after he left office?

MUELLER: Yes.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TAKEAWAYS/

1. Mueller says he would have indicted Trump for obstruction but for an OLC opinion he was forced to follow.

2. Mueller says Trump-connected witnesses impeded his investigation.

3. Mueller says that Trump can be prosecuted after he leaves office.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION/ The intelligence committee hearing, focusing on Volume 1 of the Mueller Report, is about to start. The topics at issue are substantially more grave and substantially more complex than what we heard this morning (already *very* grave material).

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 101/ Schiff begins the intelligence committee hearing by accusing the Trump campaign of disloyalty to the United States—an observation that is *inarguable* if you have read Volume 1 of the Mueller Report.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 102/ Schiff rightly says there "may" not be a crime in Vol. 1—"may" because the fact is, *we don't know yet*. There are 14 ongoing investigations, multiple counterintelligence investigations, and many crimes (notably, bribery and aiding/abetting) Mueller opted not to investigate.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 103/ This opening statement by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is *devastating*—and it may be the most clear thing we've heard from anyone today, either in government or media. It's well worth watching later on if you aren't watching it live now.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 104/ Rep. Adam Schiff (D) rightly (and methodically) notes all the things I wrote yesterday for NEWSWEEK (NB: Schiff follows this feed): newsweek.com/mueller-report…

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 105/ Now Devin Nunes (R-CA) is speaking. He calls this "the last gasp of the Russian collusion delusion." Nunes is a deranged person—to be frank. There's no other way to put it. The things he says are either false, unhinged, or made-up, thoroughly discredited conspiracy theories.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 106/ Devin Nunes's opening statement could have been written by Trump's lawyers, and for all we know it was—given that Nunes previously worked for Trump and previously colluded secretly with Trump and his legal team (feel free to Google the many major-media reports on this).

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 107/ Nunes and the GOP have been *repeatedly told* that Mueller *didn't* address the question of "collusion." They know collusion is a non-legal term and that there is evidence of collusive conduct in Mueller's report and they insist on lying about this—I guess because Trump has.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 108/ There is no credible attorney or legal analyst in America whose view of Mueller's findings mirror (or even distantly echo) those of Devin Nunes.

His conspiracy theories are grotesque and have been thoroughly discredited.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 109/ Schiff (D) is wisely moving this hearing at a *far* slower pace than Judiciary. He's speaking slowly, clearly, and cleanly. It makes all the difference.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 110/ Nunes objects to Mueller's aide being sworn in. Trump was very angry about this, so probably Nunes is doing Trump's work in objecting.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 111/ Mueller is now discussing the counterintelligence implications of his work. He says he focused on criminal activity and *not* counterintelligence conclusions. That info was *passed to the FBI* (counterintelligence division) and we *haven't heard anything of any of that yet*.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 112/ Mueller says Congress must speak to the FBI (not him) on the counterintelligence-relevant evidence he found and any conclusions US counterintelligence has drawn. Mueller says the FBI was embedded in his team to review his case file and that his office briefed them regularly.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 113/ Mueller is now *withdrawing* the statement he previously made earlier to Ted Lieu (D-CA). I expected he would do this.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 114/ Mueller agrees that the Trump campaign "welcomed" Russian aid.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 115/ Mueller says that Trump aides were trying to make money from foreign nationals during the campaign—behavior that was not disclosed at the time.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 116/ Mueller agrees that many Trump-connected witnesses lied to federal law enforcement.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 117/ Mueller says Trump's claim that his investigation was a "witch hunt" is "false."

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 118/ Mueller admits that Trump had "business dealings" in Russia during the campaign. These dealings were never revealed to voters.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 119/ Mueller agrees that the Trump campaign built a "communications campaign" around stolen Russian documents and then "lied to cover it up."

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 120/ Devin Nunes is now running through some things irrelevant to today's hearing that he wishes Robert Mueller had investigated; in the bargain, he is also misrepresenting whether Mueller explained why Carter Page was invited to the New Economic School in Moscow in July 2016.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 121/ Not sure what to say about Devin Nunes's "questions." They're not questions, they're statements, and many of the statements are false or misleading. I don't want to repeat them here.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 122/ Devin Nunes is saying he wants to know which politicians have been "compromised" by Russia and which have not been. Wow—Nunes and I agree on something.

Of course, I'm talking about Trump and his team and Nunes is talking about—for some reason—the new British Prime Minister.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 123/ Nunes is spinning Papadopoulos's discredited conspiracy theory that Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud was an FBI asset, not a Russian one. This is a direct assault on the U.S. counterintelligence community, alleging a "deep state" conspiracy to stage a coup of the presidency.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 124/ Mueller says Russia's disinformation campaign was intended to aid Donald Trump.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 125/ Mueller tells Himes (D) that Russia's hacking and dumping operation was intended to benefit Donald Trump.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 126/ Mueller says Papadopoulos lied to the FBI about his Russian contacts rather than reporting them. And he appears to say that not reporting such contacts *can* be a crime.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 127/ Mueller telling Himes (D) that it *could* be a crime not to report foreign contacts during a presidential campaign is going to be a subject of discussion given that Trump says he is perfectly willing to do precisely that.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 128/ Ratcliffe (R) is trying to clean up the Lieu-Mueller exchange, because the Republicans are terrified about it.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 129/ Mueller says he'll make no comment of any kind about Chris Steele.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 130/ Mueller underscores to Ratcliffe (R) that there *was* a pre-election election interference conspiracy—and he brought 24 indictments to that effect. The GOP keeps lazily saying "no conspiracy" when they mean "no [before-the-fact] conspiracy involving Trump, GRU, and the IRA."

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 131/ (And of course all Mueller found on the latter score was that he could not establish, on the evidence he had, evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt" of a before-the-fact Trump-GRU or Trump-IRA conspiracy.)

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 132/ Mueller says the Trump campaign was upset the Kremlin agents who came to Trump Tower in June 2016 did not give the campaign dirt on Clinton.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 133/ Mueller says the campaign never told the FBI of the Kremlin agents' offer to give dirt to the campaign.

Keep in mind the evidence suggests the FBI asked Trump and Flynn directly in August 2016 to inform them if they had any evidence the Russians were trying to make contact.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 134/ Turner (R) is now performing some theater involving piling up statute books and books of case law on his desk, challenging whether an AG can "exonerate" someone.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 135/ Whoa—Turner (R) is saying that Barr *can't exonerate Trump*.

Clearly Barr *tried* to exonerate him, so clearly Barr thinks he can.

Mueller thereafter makes some news: he implies that he put in "does not exonerate" in case Barr *didn't realize* he *couldn't* make that call.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 136/ I think Turner (R) effed up here, because he's inadvertently underscored that if Mueller doesn't recommend charges on a given topic the DOJ has to *pass the issue to Congress* (if it involves the president's actions) rather than issuing *any* kind of exoneration statement.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 137/ Mueller says to Carson (D) that Trump's campaign manager shared internal polling information with Russian intelligence during the campaign.

Read that statement multiple times.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 138/ Mueller says Manafort expected to be paid in some fashion for sharing private campaign information with Russian intelligence during the campaign.

Read that statement multiple times.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 139/ Mueller agrees that Trump's 2016 campaign manager was open to blackmail by the Kremlin during the campaign.

Read that statement multiple times.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 140/ Mueller *can't and won't say* he found "no evidence" the Trump campaign was involved in the theft of Clinton emails. This is an old GOP trick: "did not establish [beyond a reasonable doubt]" is *not the same thing* as "no evidence."

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 141/ So many semantic games today from Republicans. The GOP turns no "documentary" evidence Papadopoulos revealed Mifsud's claims (re: the Kremlin's theft of Clinton emails) into "no evidence"—those are two *wildly* different claims.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 142/ Mueller *explicitly refuses to say* there is no evidence Paul Manafort (Trump campaign) met with Julian Assange (WikiLeaks).

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 143/ Mueller *disagreed* with the claim by a Republican that there's no evidence Manafort met with Assange. It was a big—and surprising—moment.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 144/ Radical Republicans are freaking out *way* more about the intel hearing than the judiciary hearing—as predicted. The reasons are partly clear today and will partly become clear in the coming months. Republicans know that if Trump goes down it will be for *betraying America*.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 145/ Mueller explicitly rejects Trump's claim that there was any Russian "hoax." He underscores that the Russian interference campaign was real and significant.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 146/ Trump can (and may well) be *impeached* for obstruction; if he is convicted and removed, it'll be for topics based in (but that go *well* beyond) what's being discussed right now.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 147/ Stewart (R) is now spinning a conspiracy theory about the special counsel's office allegedly leaking information to CNN regarding the Roger Stone raid. This conspiracy theory has already been debunked by CNN itself (they were already on-scene; there was no leak whatsoever).

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 148/ Quigley (D) notes that the DOJ view of not indicting a president could lead to a president being immune from prosecution even post-presidency *because* if he were to be re-elected it could outlast the statute of limitations on the crime he—here, Trump—committed: obstruction.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 149/ BREAKING NEWS: Mueller tells Quigley (D) that "problematic is an understatement" with respect to Trump's comments on WikiLeaks, as then-candidate Trump's comments gave a "boost" to "criminal activity."

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 150/ The intelligence committee is about to take a break. But first, Crawford (R) is going to spin some conspiracy theories about Peter Strzok and misstate the Mueller Report for 5 minutes.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 151/ Sorry—as it turns out, Devin Nunes is going to be given a couple minutes pre-break (by his colleague) to spin some conspiracy theories and misstate the Mueller Report.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 152/ BREAKING NEWS: Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller Confirms That Events Involving the Trump Campaign and Israel Were "Outside His Ambit" and Confirms, Morever, That They Are Being Handled By FBI Counterintelligence

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 153/ NOTE: Harrowing pre-election events involving the Trump campaign and Israel—as well as Saudi Arabia and the UAE—*far more explosive* than most of what we've heard today will receive a 600-page airing in a forthcoming book now just weeks from release: amazon.com/Proof-Conspira…

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 154/ As we're in break, I'll note one of the key questions we had before this meeting was whether committee members would get Mueller to give a sense of how *much* he gave to counterintelligence rather than putting it in his report—the Israel revelation is our first hint of that.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 155/ For Mueller to say (in effect) that *anything involving Israel* went to FBI counterintelligence would seem to confirm what I have been saying for a long, long time: that the same is true for the *mountain* of evidence (some Russia-related) involving Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 156/ A very good rule of thumb in trying to understand what's happening: obstruction can and may lead to impeachment; *only* revelation of the counterintelligence evidence now being held by the FBI could lead (and indeed should lead) to Trump's conviction and removal from office.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 157/ This hearing is must-watch TV. No American of good faith could watch this and doubt that the Trump campaign betrayed America and did so with eyes wide open.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 158/ Worth noting (and I think Republicans of good faith would agree with this) is that *no one has laid a glove today on Mueller's credibility*. The GOP isn't even disputing *any* findings from the Mueller Report.

Not a single one.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 159/ Former Democratic presidential candidate Eric Swalwell is now taking Mueller through all the lying witnesses and destruction of evidence Mueller encountered—from Trump aides and associates—during the Trump-Russia investigation.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 160/ Mueller tells Swalwell (D) that Trump campaign members' use of encrypted messaging apps and their deletion of messages "hampered" his investigation.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 161/ Mueller says he *wanted to interview the president*. As we know, the president refused the interview Mueller wanted.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 162/ Swalwell (D) is doing a great job—this is how a former prosecutor does it. The difference is evident.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 163/ Stefanik (R) is trying to get Mueller to talk about counterintel evidence and Mueller is resisting. I think anyone would presume from his answers that the counterintelligence investigation by the FBI into the '16 campaign continues. It's the gold mine Americans can't access.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 164/ Bizarrely, both Republicans and Democrats want to access counterintelligence information—for different reasons. While the former would find nothing of value in that information—that we know of—the latter would find information *well* beyond what would impeach/remove a POTUS.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 165/ We *must* say it: today proves that the ongoing counterintelligence investigation into Trump is the third rail that America needs to but may not in short order be able to access.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 166/ Mueller implies there are things he can't say about Mifsud due to "jursidiction[al]" reasons and because it involves "classified" and "law enforcement" issues. That can be taken many ways, but hints at the much larger story—one horrid for Trump—we're not able to hear today.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 167/ Mueller just confirmed to Castro (D) that anything in his report is something "he believes to be true." That's a more important point than many realize: it means there is *no speculation* in the entire Mueller Report.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 168/ Mueller just said he "can't speak" to whether Donald Trump was/is compromised by possible blackmail. (Why? Because it's in the counterintelligence report. Either we begin demanding that information or we continue to guess at whether the President of the U.S. is compromised.)

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 169/ Mueller says to Hurd (R) that going into 2020, "many more countries" are developing the election-interference capacities the Russians had in 2016 and are prepared to use them. Mueller is correct, and three of those other countries are *Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the UAE*.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 170/ Mueller tells Heck (D) there was a "necessity" for input from "the Russian government" for Trump's "Trump Tower Moscow" project to go forward successfully. This was the building project Trump was secretly deeply engaged in, and repeatedly lied about, during the '16 campaign.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 171/ Mueller says "sanctions" *were discussed* at the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, but it wasn't the "main" subject—which necessarily means that he considers Clinton "dirt" (the only *other* topic on the table) *was* the "main" subject of the meeting, in Robert Mueller's view.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 172/ Wow. Now Nunes (R) is spreading Erik *Prince's* crazy conspiracy theories about the CIA surveilling him and leaking what they found to media.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 173/ Now Devin Nunes is back to his own dangerous and creepy conspiracy theories, implying that Konstantin Kilimnik is a U.S. agent, not a Russian agent—another attack on federal law enforcement and a floating of a "deep state" conspiracy theory regarding a coup of the president.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 174/ Mueller tells Welch (D) that not establishing something *beyond a reasonable doubt* (the *highest standard of proof* in the criminal justice system) is quite simply a *totally different concept* from finding "no evidence" of something. This smashes a longstanding GOP canard.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 175/ Mueller to Welch (D) on the Trump campaign's actions pre-election: "I hope this is not the new normal [in U.S. elections], but I fear it is." This is a quote you'll hear repeated a lot by media, I think.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 176/ Mueller tells Maloney (D) he decided—at the end of his investigation—not to the subpoena the president because he needed to "expedite" the investigation and that Trump "fighting" the subpoena would drag out the investigation. So Trump stymied an interview with legal threats.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 177/ BREAKING NEWS: Robert Mueller Says That the Threat of Trump Legal Action Stymied His Desire to Interview the President Face-to-Face, Resulting in Written Interview Answers from Trump That Were "Incomplete," "Imprecise," "Inadequate," and "Insufficient"

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 178/ Mueller concedes that he *could* have subpoenaed the president. He concedes that it was "vital" to his investigation. He said he was balancing "how much evidence [he] had" of "corrupt intent [to obstruct]" against how much time it would take to interview Trump.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 179/ The facts in Tweet #178 underscore what Maloney was getting at, and it's a *key* fact: Mueller thought he had enough evidence of Trump's "corrupt intent" (regarding obstruction of justice) that he didn't need to spend months trying to get an interview Trump on obstruction.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 180/ Mueller: Trump gave "incomplete" answers to federal law enforcement about his in-campaign "Trump Tower Moscow" deal.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 181/ Mueller: Trump refused to answer some questions from federal law enforcement, gave multiple answers that contradicted other evidence, and refused to answer any follow-up questions.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 182/ Please RT this BREAKING NEWS:

DEMINGS: Isn't it fair to say the president's written answers were not only inadequate and incomplete—because he didn't answer many of your questions—but also where he did his answers showed he wasn't always being truthful?

MUELLER: Generally.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 183/ BREAKING NEWS: Mueller concedes to Krishnamoorthi (D) that his office reached *no counterintelligence conclusions whatsoever* regarding whether Trump officials could be vulnerable to blackmail. Mueller says the FBI is making those decisions and they don't appear in his work.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 184/ BREAKING NEWS: Mueller Concedes That Possible Money Laundering Was Outside His Purview and Is Being Handled by FBI Counterintelligence

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 185/ Krishnamoorthi (D) did more than *anyone* to underscore how *little* Mueller looked at compared to the counterintelligence investigation *we still know absolutely nothing about*.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 186/ MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: Mueller Confirms FBI's Trump-Russia Counterintelligence Investigation Is Ongoing

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 187/ MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: Mueller Confirms Ongoing FBI Trump-Russia Counterintelligence Investigation Is Still Determining Whether Trump Is Compromised By Russia

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 188/ Krishnamoorthi (D) absolutely *killed* it—imagine if during the *whole hearing* Democrats had been asking counterintelligence-relevant questions like Krishnamoorthi did.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 189/ Schiff was the final questioner. Mueller told him that accepting illegal foreign campaign donations is wrong, unethical, unpatriotic, and under certain circumstances a crime.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 190/ Mueller says we should hold public officials to a higher ethical standard than mere criminality. (By the way, Schiff, his questioner, is now, and is always, an excellent questioner. Some of the Democrats on the intelligence committee really shone today.)

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 191/ Mueller concedes someone can be compromised and exposed to blackmail if a foreign nation knows that they are lying about something or know about a business transaction that is otherwise hidden. This is *the same thing as saying Trump is compromised*, people. Watch the video.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 192/ Mueller admits it's possible the Kremlin had a tape recording of Trump's attorney's (Cohen's) calls with them and that such tapes could be used as blackmail material.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 193/ The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence today established that America *needs to see a counterintelligence report from the FBI about whether the President of the United States is currently compromised by a foreign power*.

We *cannot wait any longer* to see it.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 194/ My grades for the Intel Committee are going to be different than they were for the Judiciary Committee—I can tell you that. The real question now is whether folks in media understand Vol. 1 of the report—and the ongoing counterintelligence probe—well enough to talk about it.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 195/ So much news came out of the Intelligence Committee hearing that I think some of it will actually be missed because it is *so* "big" and *so* in the open it can be miscast as just another moment in just another hearing.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 196/ Adam Schiff has now made clear that he is going to track that (ongoing, still-active) counterintelligence investigation and report down—and aggressively. And we as Americans should be *insisting* on that not just from him but from all members of Congress.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 197/ I will freely concede that far more news was made in the Intelligence Community hearing than I expected. I knew this would be the more momentous hearing historically, but I didn't realize that in the final 20 minutes of this hearing this much breaking news would be produced.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 198/ HOUSE INTEL COMMITTEE GRADES:

Democrats: A.
Democrats methodically made a harrowing case and *eventually* revealed why we need to see counterintelligence evidence.

GOP: D.
Republicans did no more than spin bizarre conspiracy theories—they challenged no facts in the report.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 199/ HOUSE INTEL COMMITTEE TAKEAWAYS:

1. There are too many to mention—you'll have to read over this thread.

2. The FBI's counterintelligence investigation is still ongoing—and still working to determine if the President of the United States has been compromised by the Kremlin.

@tedlieu @joshscampbell 200/ Today should mark the *start* of Americans asking questions about a) the FBI's counterintelligence report, which we've still seen *nothing* of, and b) public discourse about what Schiff mentioned at the end: Russia-related collusion that *also* involved other countries. /end