Thread by @SethAbramson

(BREAKING NEWS THREAD) A historic legal analysis published by @Slate confirms what this feed asserts—the Mueller Report FOUND a criminal conspiracy between Trump's campaign and the Kremlin but declined to charge it. Please RETWEET this thread explaining this explosive revelation.

@Slate 1/ As law professor @jedshug explains on @Slate, federal law doesn't require an explicit agreement between parties for the criminal statute prohibiting coordination between campaigns and foreign nationals to be violated. Paul Manafort committed this crime.

https://twitter.com/realTrumpcast/status/1154617463885225984

@Slate @jedshug 2/ The Mueller Report erroneously proceeded under an interpretation of federal law that no independent legal experts have agreed with: that a criminal conspiracy to violate election law requires an explicit agreement. But whether this "error" was indeed an *accident* is in doubt.

@Slate @jedshug 3/ The evidence of the Mueller Report, criminal investigative SOPs, and major-media reporting establishes that the original intent of the special counsel's office was to charge Paul Manafort with conspiracy with Russia—and that Trump knew this and sought to obstruct this finding.

@Slate @jedshug 4/ NBC News reported in January 2018 that Donald Trump privately believed Paul Manafort could incriminate him in a federal crime—but that by January 2018, information had reached him (privately) that had convinced him that Manafort would not in fact do so. nbcnews.com/storyline/2018…

@Slate @jedshug 5/ The Mueller Report clearly establishes that Trump received the private intelligence that Paul Manafort would not incriminate him in a conspiracy—by refusing to cooperate with federal law enforcement, *not* because Manafort *couldn't* incriminate him—from Manafort's legal team.

@Slate @jedshug 6/ Criminal investigative SOPs (standard operating procedures) establish why Trump believed federal law enforcement would seek to have Manafort incriminate him: because investigators do not cut deals with a national campaign manager *without* seeking to indict someone higher up.

@Slate @jedshug 7/ When the special counsel's office charged Manafort with offenses that could put him in federal prison for 20 years—and then entered into a cooperation deal with him—the only person above him in the campaign hierarchy for him to "flip" on was the presidential candidate himself.

@Slate @jedshug 8/ The legal analysis published digitally by @Slate confirms the uncharged offense on Manafort would have been a federal criminal—election—conspiracy with individuals he knew from his work on behalf of the Kremlin were Kremlin agents. This is the "flip" Trump was terrified about.

@Slate @jedshug 9/ The Mueller Report establishes that Manafort had been a paid Kremlin agent, via Oleg Deripaska—who says he "does not separate himself" or his interests from those of the Kremlin—since the year Manafort moved into Trump Tower (2006), and that he remained so during the campaign.

@Slate @jedshug 10/ Manafort's work for the Kremlin—once thought to have ended in the early 2010s—in fact continued in and past his work as Trump's campaign manager. Mueller's report and testimony establishes that Manafort anticipated both loan forgiveness and cash from the Kremlin for his work.

@Slate @jedshug 11/ Mueller's report and testimony establishes Manafort as a Kremlin agent in 2016 and after—federal law establishes he was in a criminal conspiracy with the Kremlin based upon his agreement to coordinate with and provide proprietary data/intelligence to the Kremlin mid-campaign.

@Slate @jedshug 12/ That Donald Trump thought Mueller would indict him if Manafort flipped means that Trump had knowledge of the criminal conspiracy Mueller opted not to charge Manafort with—a decision Mueller made so Manafort would flip on Trump. Trump's criminal obstruction prevented any flip.

@Slate @jedshug 13/ The Mueller Report outlines how Trump—through a joint defense agreement with Manafort and his lawyers acting as intermediaries—made it absolutely clear to Manafort that he would be "taken care of" if he refused to "flip" on his former boss. The obstruction hid the conspiracy.

@Slate @jedshug 14/ For those who haven't read Vol. 1 of the Mueller Report, I'll now briefly summarize the federal criminal election conspiracy Mueller chose not to indict Manafort for because of a) him thinking Manafort would flip on Trump, b) an "error" of law by the special counsel's office.

@Slate @jedshug 15/ I put "error" in quotes advisedly. Mueller cut a cooperation deal with Manafort because his office *knew* the federal criminal statutes governing US election law do not require "explicit" coordination; that Manafort had violated these laws; and that he could "flip" on Trump.

@Slate @jedshug 16/ There was no reason for Mueller to cut a deal with Manafort—or for his office to represent to federal courts that the lies Manafort told the SCO that mattered were the lies hiding this conspiracy—if the feds did not believe Manafort had committed an election conspiracy crime.

@Slate @jedshug 17/ Here's what Trump's campaign manager did: within days of his hire by Trump he contacted a known Kremlin agent—Kilimnik, who Manafort knew to be a Kremlin agent both through direct contact with him and his (Manafort's) other deputy, Gates—to seek compensation from the Kremlin.

@Slate @jedshug 18/ That compensation—Mueller's report and testimony confirms—was in the form of both loan forgiveness and direct payment from Kremlin agents. In recompense, as a quid pro quo that was either implicit or explicit (federal law criminalizes either), Manafort would aid the Kremlin.

@Slate @jedshug 19/ Manafort thereafter—almost immediately—did at least 3 things:

1. He directed his deputy Gates to *regularly* provide proprietary internal polling data to the Kremlin that would allow the Kremlin to better direct its domestic disinformation campaign (a crime) against America.

@Slate @jedshug 20/

2. Paul Manafort offered Kremlin agents internal campaign intelligence assessments about Trump's campaign tactics and strategy, the better to convince the Kremlin that Trump had a chance of winning and that its pro-Trump hacking and disinformation campaigns should continue.

@Slate @jedshug 21/

3. Paul Manafort initiated an 18-month negotiation with Kremlin agents (beginning August 2, 2016 and continuing into '18) with the goal of the negotiations being to promise Putin sanctions relief in exchange for pre-election assistance to—and post-election comity with—Trump.

@Slate @jedshug 22/ The Mueller Report and major-media reporting establishes that Trump was in regular contact with Manafort about his campaign from the day he was hired and about *sanctions* both before and after his fake "firing" in August 2016. And we know that the "firing" was indeed fake.

@Slate @jedshug 23/ The Mueller Report and major-media reporting establishes that Trump remained in regular contact with Manafort on the subject of sanctions after his "firing" in mid-August 2016; indeed, eyewitnesses say Manafort basically continued advising Trump exactly as he had done before.

@Slate @jedshug 24/ Immediately upon his "firing," Manafort went on a cruise with one of Trump's two best friends, Thomas Barrack (the other is Howard Lorber) during which cruise Barrack orchestrated payment to Manafort of millions and millions of dollars via sources tied to the Trump campaign.

@Slate @jedshug 25/ This cruise remains under federal probe—and Gates remains a federal cooperating witness despite the filing of the Mueller Report because Gates is now the lone witness who can testify to what Manafort and Trump did, who knew of it, and Trump's efforts to sway him via Manafort.

@Slate @jedshug 26/ Mueller's testimony indicates the question of collusion (whether a person is compromised by a foreign power due to implicit or express coordination) is now in the hands of the FBI's counterintel division, which—with Manafort's prison sentence—explains the lack of new charges.

@Slate @jedshug 27/ Mueller testified he wanted to move quickly to file a report; the implication is he didn't want to interfere with the 2020 election—given that he'd been investigating the many insidious ways the Russians had done just that in '16. He knew counterintelligence work was ongoing.

@Slate @jedshug 28/ Mueller knew Trump had successfully obstructed justice to keep Manafort from cooperating; Manafort was in prison and going nowhere; Gates remained a cooperating witness; counterintelligence investigators were looking more explicitly at collusion and are continuing their work.

@Slate @jedshug 29/

There is no legal or factual basis to say Manafort was *not* in a criminal election conspiracy with the Kremlin.

There is no legal or factual basis to say Trump did *not* know Manafort could incriminate him or that he did *not* take steps to obstruct/tamper with Manafort.

@Slate @jedshug 30/ Given Mueller's testimony, his report, major-media reports, and investigative SOPs, there are *no facts* and is *no law* on the other side of what this thread explains: a conspiracy occurred; Mueller wanted to charge it; he knew Trump knew of it; Trump obstructed that charge.

@Slate @jedshug 31/ The only question that remains is why the special counsel's office misstated federal election law and withheld charging Manafort with the conspiracy they believed he'd engaged in—and whose revelation they knew Trump had obstructed. But the fact of ongoing CI work explains it.

@Slate @jedshug 32/ To explain: we learned yesterday a shocking fact—that Mueller didn't subpoena Trump *though he knew he could* because he felt he had enough evidence of corrupt intent *and* needed to bring *his* part of the Trump-Russia case to an expeditious end. He testified to all of this.

@Slate @jedshug 33/ The Manafort situation was identical: Mueller's work confirms he knew a crime had occurred—hence the Manafort cooperation deal—and Manafort could flip on the only man higher than him (Trump). But charging a crime in light of Trump's obstruction would've taken months—or years.

@Slate @jedshug 34/ With Vol. 2 (obstruction), Mueller relented on actions he knew he could take because he felt he had enough evidence. With Vol. 1 (conspiracy), Mueller relented on actions he knew he could take because an ongoing counterintelligence investigation would achieve the same result.

@Slate @jedshug 35/ Legal experts should feel free to check the legal analysis of @jedshug and the investigative, factual, and Mueller Report analyses I've provided here and elsewhere. They are correct: a conspiracy occurred; the evidence indicates Trump knew of it and obstructed its disclosure.

@Slate @jedshug 36/ Moreover, additional evidence comes from the mouths of the men themselves: Trump told friends Manafort could incriminate him; Manafort told Gates Trump was tampering with him; Kilimnik and other witnesses confirm Manafort committed election conspiracy crimes with the Kremlin.

@Slate @jedshug 37/ Still other witnesses—including one Manafort family member and Trump's best friend Barrack—confirm how close Manafort and Trump were, what the men discussed and how frequently and when, and the fact that work was indeed being done to compensate Manafort even post-"firing."

@Slate @jedshug 38/ If you wonder why this legal and investigative analysis didn't come together until Mueller's testimony, it's because many of us were waiting for several revelations that came during his testimony which are *central* to this thread. 15 of them are here:

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1154441003622944768

@Slate @jedshug 39/ One other thing we learned by Mueller's testimony—though I've been saying it here for 2 years—is that this is the most complicated federal criminal investigation of our lifetimes. No one person can have full mastery over its contours. So it's no surprise no one in media does.

@Slate @jedshug 40/ We often ignore legal/investigative experts to listen to what media tells us. Media didn't follow the facts or law laid out here so it has reported—and will keep reporting—no conspiracy occurred. But lawyers and investigators should feel free to check the work done here. /end

@Slate @jedshug PS/ Many reading this may now say, "What now? Manafort committed a federal election crime and conspiracy with Kremlin agents, all the evidence says Trump knew of it, Mueller knew Trump knew of it, and Trump committed crimes to block Manafort from revealing it"—so what comes next?

@Slate @jedshug PS2/ First, the fight to get Congressional (and eventually partial public) access to the FBI counterintelligence case file, findings, and report began only *yesterday*. The Congresspeople *leading* that fight know federal law, and do not disagree with the analysis in this thread.

@Slate @jedshug PS3/ Second, now that Mueller's testimony—see my link to my prior tweet earlier in this thread—has revealed at least five new pieces of information that allow the understanding I've laid out here to crystallize, a public information campaign must begin in D.C. *and* social media.

@Slate @jedshug PS4/ Anyone on social media can now—in good faith—say the following:

1. Manafort criminally conspired with the Kremlin during the '16 presidential election.

2. The special counsel's office believed this and it acted accordingly.

3. Trump believed this and he acted accordingly.

@Slate @jedshug PS5/ And one can then add this addendum:

4. The FBI Counterintelligence Division is now conducting an investigation into collusion between Trump and foreign powers—including Russia—that is far larger in scope than Mueller's work and has Rick Gates as a key witness on conspiracy.

@Slate @jedshug NOTE/ I do not seek or desire for anyone reading this to "take my word for it." Read the Mueller Report; read the transcript of Mueller's testimony; read the relevant federal election laws; confirm my major-media references; look up why/when federal cooperation deals are offered.

@Slate @jedshug CREDIT/ Thanks to Virginia Heffernan (@page88) for interviewing @jedshug for @Slate and letting the professor clearly and in some detail—and at some length—outline these harrowing facts/realities. Again, here's the link to the relevant digital publication:

https://twitter.com/realTrumpcast/status/1154617463885225984

@Slate @jedshug @page88 LEGAL NOTE/ The Mueller Report, as to conspiracy, said only that it couldn't establish it beyond a reasonable doubt *as of the time of the report* but that additional information—yes, the report says this—could change that analysis. Then we learned the CI probe was still ongoing.

@Slate @jedshug @page88 LEGAL NOTE 2/ So if you post my synopsis and someone says, "But Mueller said there was no conspiracy!", tell them the following: no, that's not what the report says. At all. It says it couldn't be established beyond a reasonable doubt *in part due to Trump-connected impediments*.

@Slate @jedshug @page88 LEGAL NOTE 3/ Direct anyone contesting this finding to pg. 10 of Vol. 1 of Mueller's report—and Mueller's testimony—which establishes (a) the long list of impediments the special counsel faced—most of them linked to Trump's camp—and (b) that new evidence can/will change matters.

@Slate @jedshug @page88 CREDIT 2/ I want to further credit @page88 (from @Slate) with a piece of analysis that I've heard nowhere else but is 100% accurate: the evidence that Paul Manafort remained a Kremlin agent in '16 is so overwhelming that Trump's ties to *Manafort* needed to be fully investigated.

@Slate @jedshug @page88 CREDIT 3/ While I've written of Manafort's lengthy history with both the Kremlin and Trump in both of my books and have long considered him a Kremlin agent, now that Mueller says Manafort expected payment post-campaign it *does* mean the Trump-Manafort linkage is its own scandal.

@Slate @jedshug @page88 LEGAL NOTE 4/ Understand, too, that Mueller's legal determination that the OLC opinion was binding on him meant that even if he'd charged Manafort with a new crime that would take 6 months to a year to try and Manafort had flipped on Trump after, he *still* couldn't indict Trump.

@Slate @jedshug @page88 LEGAL NOTE 5/ Meanwhile, the counterintelligence probe Mueller deferred to covered the same events/witnesses Mueller's office had dealt with *and* more; had a lower standard of proof (preponderance of the evidence); could look at collusion; and could report to Congress if needed.

@Slate @jedshug @page88 CONCLUSION/ So if you wonder why Trump just gave Barr power to disclose classified intel to Trump transition official Nunes—and why Trump may be trying to make Nunes the Director of National Intelligence—that's why. The threat to him has moved there, so he needs Barr/Nunes on it.