Thread by @Teri_Kanefield

(Thread) Intel Committee Zingers

I listed Zingers from the Mueller Judiciary Committee hearing here:

https://twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield/status/1154242902328926208

I talked about the Democratic strategy from the Mueller Intel Committee hearing here:

https://twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield/status/1154122905619271680

This is long thread (apologies in advance) but I think it's helpful to have these Tweet form.

#1:

SCHIFF: Director Mueller, your report describes a sweeping and systematic effort by Russia to influence our presidential election. Is that correct?

MUELLER: That is correct.

#2:

SCHIFF: And during the course of this Russian interference in the election, the Russians made outreach to the Trump campaign, did they not?

MUELLER: That occurred over the course of - yes, that occurred.

#3:

SCHIFF: In fact, the campaign welcomed the Russian help, did they not?

MUELLER: I think we have - we report in our - in the report indications that that occurred, yes.

#4:

SCHIFF: The president’s son said when he was approached about dirt on Hillary Clinton that the Trump campaign would love it?

MUELLER: That is generally what was said, yes.

#5:

SCHIFF: The president himself called on the Russians to hack Hillary’s emails?

MUELLER: There was a statement by the president in those general lines.

#6:

SCHIFF: Numerous times during the campaign the president praised the releases of the Russian-hacked emails through WikiLeaks?

MUELLER: That did occur.

#7:

SCHIFF: . . . several individuals associated with the Trump campaign were also trying to make money during the campaign and transition. Is that correct?

MUELLER: That is true.

#8: SCHIFF: Paul Manafort was trying to make money or achieve debt forgiveness from a Russian oligarch?

MUELLER: Generally that is accurate.

#9:

SCHIFF: Michael Flynn was trying to make money from Turkey?

MUELLER: True.

#10:

SCHIFF: Donald Trump was trying to make millions from a real estate deal in Moscow?

MUELLER: To the extent you’re talking about the hotel in Moscow?

SCHIFF: Yes.

MUELLER: Yes.

#11:

SCHIFF: Your investigation is not a witch hunt. Is…

MUELLER: It is not a witch hunt.

#12:

SCHIFF: When the president said the Russian interference was a hoax, that was false, wasn’t it?

MUELLER: True.

SCHIFF: We decided publicly it was false?

MUELLER: He did say publicly that it was false, yes.

(a bit confusing, but I'm including it)

#13:

SCHIFF: You would consider a billion dollar deal to build a tower in Moscow to be business dealings, wouldn’t you, Director Mueller?

MUELLER: Absolutely.

#14: (After establishing that the Russians committed a crime in stealing emails in order to help Trump)

SCHIFF: The Trump campaign officials built their strategy - their messaging strategy around those stolen documents?

MUELLER: Generally that’s true.

#15:

SCHIFF: And then they lied to cover it up.

MUELLER: Generally, that’s true.

(This is leading somewhere! It's all building!

This is what good testimony does! I know, it's always snappier in TV courtroom drama. But that's fiction. Real life pales in comparison.)

#16:

(Regarding the offer of “dirt” against HRC)

SEWELL: Sir, is it not the responsibility of political campaigns to inform the FBI if they receive information from a foreign government?

MUELLER: I would think that that is something they would and should do.

#17:

SEWELL: . . . on several occasions the president directed aides not to publicly disclose the email setting up the June 9th meeting.

MUELLER: Yes, that’s accurate.

#18:

Your investigation, sir, found a number of troubling contacts between Mr. Manafort and Russian individuals during and after the campaign. Is that right sir?

MUELLER: Correct.

#19:

CARSON: In addition to the June 9th meeting just discussed, Manafort also met several time with a man named Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI assessed to have ties with Russian intel agencies. Is that right, sir?

MUELLER: Correct.

#20

CARSON: In fact, Mr. Manafort didn’t just meet with him; he shared private Trump campaign polling information with this man linked to Russian intelligence. Is that right, sir?

MUELLER: That is -- that is correct.

#21:

CARSON: Mr. Manafort went so far as to offer this Russian oligarch tied to Putin a private briefing on the campaign. Is that right, sir?

MUELLER: Yes, sir.

#22:

CARSON: Well, it’s clear that he hoped to be paid back money he was owed by Russian or Ukrainian oligarchs in return for the passage of private campaign information. Correct, sir?

MUELLER: That -- that is true.

#23:

CARSON: Would you agree, sir, that Manafort’s contacts with Russians close to Vladimir Putin and his efforts to exchange private information on Americans for money left him vulnerable to blackmail by the Russians?

MUELLER: I think generally so that would be the case.

#24

(referring back Nunes calling the investigation the “Russian hoax”)

SPEIER: Would you agree that it was not a hoax that the Russians were engaged in trying to impact our election?

MUELLER: Absolutely. It was not a hoax . . . (continued)

#24, continued

MUELLER: . . .The indictments we returned against the Russians, two different ones, were substantial in their scope . . . and would have long term damage to the United States that we need to move quickly to address.

#25: Quigley listed the evidence of Jr’s communications with Wikileaks (vol. 1, p. 59)

QUIGLEY: Is this behavior at the ver least disturbing? Your reaction?

MUELLER: Disturbing and also subject to investigation.

(Did you all get that? Sounds like Jr. is under investigation)

#26:

Schiff followed up and asked if the Jr’s behavior was “unethical.”

MUELLER: Certainly calls for an investigation.

(I read that as confirmation that Jr. is either under investigation, or should be.)

#27:

SWALWELL: . . . as a prosecutor you would agree that if a witness or suspect lies or obstructs or tampers with witnesses or destroys evidence during an investigation that generally that conduct can be used to show a consciousness of guilt?

MUELLER: Yes.

#28: SWALWELL followed up with behavior that shows consciousness of guilt (a legal term, by the way) such as:

SWALWELL: And your investigation was hampered by Trump campaign official’s use of encryption communications. Is that right?

MUELLER: We believe that to be the case.

#29:

SWALWELL . . . [your] office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light. Is that correct?

MUELLER: That is correct. We don’t know what we don’t know.

#30:

HECK: . . . Trump Tower in Moscow. We indicated earlier that it was a lucrative deal. Trump, in fact, stood in his company to earn many millions of dollars on that deal, did they not, sir?

MUELLER: True.

(plus he lied about it)

#31 (After establishing that a crime would not generally be charged without enough evidence to prove that crime beyond a reasonable doubt. . )

WELCH: But making that decision does not mean your investigation failed to turn up evidence of conspiracy.

MUELLER: Absolutely correct.

#32: (After talking about the Trump campaign’s willingness to accept foreign help)

WELCH: And my concern is, have we established a new normal . . .

MUELLER: Well, I hope ...

WELCH: Go ahead.

MUELLER: I hope this is not the new normal, but I fear it is.

#33:

DEMINGS: Director Mueller, isn’t it fair to say that the president’s written answers . . . show that he wasn’t always being truthful.

MUELLER: There -- I would say generally.

(Edited to fit it into a Tweet)

#34:

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Similarly since it was outside your purview your report does not address the question of whether Russian oligarchs engaged in money laundering through any of the president’s businesses, correct?

MUELLER: Correct.

#35:

KRISHNAMOORTHI: I’d like to turn your attention to counterintelligence risks associated with lying.

Individuals can be subject to blackmail if they lie about their interactions with foreign countries, correct?

MUELLER: True.

#36:

HURD: . . . did you think this was a single attempt by the Russians to get involved in our election. . . ?

MUELLER: It wasn’t a single attempt. They're doing it as we sit here, and they expect to do it during the next campaign.

(This is a Super Zinger)

#37:

SCHIFF: From your testimony today I’d gather that knowingly accepting assistance from a foreign government is an unethical thing to do.

MUELLER: And a crime.

SCHIFF: And a crime.

MUELLER: Given the circumstances.

(another Super Zinger)

#38:

SCHIFF: And to the degree that it undermines our democracy and our institutions, we can also agree that it’s unpatriotic.

MUELLER: True.

SCHIFF: And wrong.

MUELLER: True.

#39:

SCHIFF: I’m just referring to ethical standards. We should hold our elected officials to a higher standard than mere evidence of criminality, shouldn’t we?

MUELLER: Absolutely.

(Actually, Schiff went on a roll of Super Zingers)

#40:

SCHIFF: The need to act in ethical manner is not just a moral one, but when people act unethically it also exposes them to compromise particularly in dealing with foreign powers, is that true?


MUELLER: True.

#41

SCHIFF: Because when someone acts unethically in connection with a foreign partner, that foreign partner can expose their wrongdoing and extort them.

MUELLER: True.

#42:

SCHIFF: It could also just involve deception. If you are lying about something that can be exposed, then you can be blackmailed.

MUELLER: Also true.

(See how he's showing that Trump's actions don't have to be a crime to endanger the nation? This took major prep work)

#43:

SCHIFF: and so we have Candidate Trump whose saying “I have no dealings with the Russians,” but if the Russians had a tape recording, they could expose that, could they not?

MUELLER: Yes.

(In other words, we have a president who's compromised and vulnerable to blackmail)

As an appellate lawyer who reads court transcripts for a living, I can tell you this level of questioning takes skill and preparation.

So let's stop the nonsense that the House has been doing "nothing."

Next I'll analyze the GOP strategy that emerged (probably tomorrow).

Should have been “read” transcripts, past tense. Now I’m writing books.

And twitter threads :)

My threads are also blog posts. You can view this one here: terikanefield-blog.com/intel-committe…