Thread by @moscow_project

The House Judiciary Committee is set to hear evidence from the on-going impeachment investigation into President Trump. Watch it here, and follow along for our live analysis:
c-span.org/video/?467123-…

As @RepJerryNadler just noted, the White House was invited to participate in these hearings, but rejected the invitation.
That probably won't stop Trump and his defenders from claiming that Trump is being denied due process, though.
nbcnews.com/politics/trump…

@RepJerryNadler "Even if the president is unwilling to honor his oath, I am compelled to honor mine."
-@RepJerryNadler

@RepJerryNadler Nadler reviews the facts, and their obvious conclusion:
"President Trump put himself before country."

@RepJerryNadler Before questioning begins, Nadler cuts through some of the clouds of dust Trump's defenders have kicked up surrounding these hearings:

@RepJerryNadler Nadler explains the urgency of impeachment hearings when the president's abuse of office is an attempt to rig a rapidly-approaching election in his favor:

As usual, Collins opens by claiming the facts don't match Nadler's allegations, but neglects to dispute a single fact that's been brought before the committee.
That's because the facts show that Trump did it.
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/trump…

Collins: "It's interesting: They made their whole case built on Gordon Sondland."
Fact-check: They made their case on more than a dozen witnesses, many of whom are still officials in the Trump administration.
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/trump…

The founders had three offenses in mind when they wrote impeachment into the Constitution.
Trump committed all three.

"A president cannot abuse his power to secure an election. He cannot do that at the expense of the American people. That is an impeachable offense."

Berke lays out Trump's scheme: First, withholding a White House meeting until Zelensky announced his desired investigations ...

... then, withholding hundreds of millions of dollars of vital military aid and delivering the demand himself on the July 25 call.

Berke debunks the GOP's defenses:
-The aid was only released after pressure from the whistleblower and Congress
-Trump had no interest in fighting corruption in Ukraine

-Yes, Ukraine understood it was being pressured
-Yes, there was clearly a quid pro quo

Trump is trying to run the same playbook he did with the Mueller investigation: obstruct, obstruct, obstruct.

In 2016, Trump called on a foreign government to interfere in the election on his behalf—and they immediately sprang into action.
In 2019, Trump did it again—and there's every reason to believe he had the same expectation.

Castor is trying to make it sound like impeachment is all about the July 25 call.
It's not—although that call may have been impeachable on its own.
It's about a months-long pattern of bribery and extortion.
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/debun…

Reminder: Michael Cohen is a disgraced felon because he lied to Congress *to defend Trump* in the Russia investigation, and because he orchestrated an illegal hush-fund scheme in which the president is directly implicated as an unindicted coconspirator.
politico.com/story/2018/11/…

Castor called for a "give and take" between Congress and the White House, blaming Congress for the lack thereof.
He's apparently forgotten the White House's unprecedented efforts to block any and all witnesses from testifying, even under subpoena.
washingtonpost.com/politics/trump…

Castor capably summarizes the allegations against Trump, and the clear evidence of what he did:

Castor just said something obviously, demonstrably false: Ukrainian officials knew well before August 28 that aid was being withheld. In fact, there's evidence suggesting they knew as early as July 25, the day of Trump's call with Zelensky.
nbcnews.com/politics/trump…

Reminder: Republicans are trying to mount a defense based on Trump's sincere concern about corruption the day after the Attorney General held a $30,000 holiday party at the private, for-profit hotel the president owns just blocks from the White House.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/…

Castor says there's no reason to hold this impeachment hearing just 11 months before a presidential election.
Here's Nadler explaining an hour ago why it's so urgent:

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1204043584833572864

"President Trump directed a months-long campaign to solicit foreign help in his 2020 re-election efforts, withholding official acts from the government of Ukraine in order to coerce and secure political assistance and interference in our domestic affairs."

The extortion scheme wasn't the only abuse of office.
The White House immediately followed it up with a corrupt cover-up that continues to this day.
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/the-t…

"President Trump's persistent and continuing effort to coerce a foreign country to help him cheat to win an election is a clear and present danger to our free and fair elections and to our national security."

"The evidence from these witnesses cannot seriously be disputed. The president placed his personal interests above the nation's interests in order to help his own re-election efforts."

Goldman outlines the key findings of the investigation so far:

Goldman fills in the context that Castor and Trump's other defenders continue to ignore about the July 25 call with Zelensky, which clearly shows why it was an abuse of Trump's power:

Immediately after discussing military aid to Ukraine, Trump asked Zelensky to "do us a favor, though:" open two investigations that would help Trump's re-election efforts in 2020.

Goldman explains Trump's "CrowdStrike" nonsense, and why it's mutually exclusive with the mountain of evidence that Russia interfered in the 2016 election.

We don't have to speculate about whether Trump's Ukraine conspiracy theories are in Putin's interests. We just have to listen to Putin's own words on the subject:

Goldman debunks the conspiracy theories about the Bidens, and notes that witness after witness debunked them, as well:

The call shows that Zelensky understood the stakes of the quid pro quo, as well: He needed Trump on his side as Ukraine wages an ongoing war with Russia over its eastern front.

By the end of the call, both sides understood perfectly well what was going on: a quid pro quo of a White House meeting in exchange for the investigations Trump was demanding.

"The July 25 call was neither the start nor the end of president trump's efforts to use the powers of his office for personal political gain"—but it clearly crystallizes Trump's corrupt motives and goals.

Trump began making his demands clear to the aides doing his bidding in May, when he told them to talk to Rudy Giuliani—who told them Trump wanted Ukraine to announce an investigation into Burisma, a clear shorthand for the Bidens.

The evidence clearly shows that Ukraine got Trump's message, and, by the end of the summer, was ready to comply with his demands by announcing investigations of his political opponents:

According to text messages, U.S. and Ukrainian officials were negotiating a statement for Zelensky to give on the subject of corruption.
Giuliani had one addition: explicitly naming the two investigations Trump was demanding.
It wasn't about corruption—it was about helping Trump.

Even without the thousands of documents the White House is withholding, the evidence shows that everybody involved understood the quid pro quo: A White House meeting and millions in military aid in exchange for political favors on Trump's behalf.

"President Trump wanted President Zelensky in a public box. A private commitment was not good enough."

In a phone call with Sondland, Trump denied there was a quid pro quo—then immediately explained the quid pro quo. And within weeks, Zelensky was willing to do exactly as Trump asked.

If the mountains of evidence the investigation uncovered isn't enough, there's also the explicit declaration from chief of staff Mick Mulvaney that it was a quid pro quo:

Congressional pressure forced Trump to release the aid before Zelensky delivered on his demands—but that doesn't mean his efforts to solicit foreign interference have ended.

Goldman summarizes Trump's extortion scheme:
-He demanded investigations of his political opponents
-He withheld a White House meeting and military aid
-Everyone was in the loop
-His abuses of power have not stopped

Castor says there was "no discussion on the call about ... security sector assistance to Ukraine."
That's blatantly false.
It is literally the last thing Zelensky says before Trump asks him to "do us a favor, though."
whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…

Castor's going back through the Burisma talking points.
Here's Volker dismissing the allegations against Biden as a conspiracy theory.

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1196903372248494081?s=20

And, as George Kent testified, Biden's work in Ukraine made an investigation into his son's company *more* likely, not less.

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1194644422572564486?s=20

Castor continues the work of laundering Trump's demand for an investigation into CrowdStrike into generic frustration with scattered Ukrainian officials criticizing his candidacy.
Here's why that's wrong:

https://twitter.com/amprog/status/1204084753462374400

We debunked the broader Ukrainian interference conspiracy theories here: themoscowproject.org/dispatch/debun…

Once again, it took Castor almost 20 minutes to get to a single substantive defense against the allegations—and once again, it's obviously false, because, yes, Ukraine did understand it was being extorted. themoscowproject.org/dispatch/debun…

Castor is questioning Sondland's testimony, noting that his story changed from his first hearing to his last public.
That's because he didn't tell the whole truth in his closed-door deposition, then revised when other testimony revealed his dishonesty.
nytimes.com/2019/11/05/us/…

Those changes support, rather than discredit, the process so far: Closed-door depositions are standard in many investigations, and exist in part to frustrate witnesses' efforts to coordinate testimony and expose this kind of dishonesty or partial truth. usatoday.com/story/news/pol…

Castor cites the September 9 call where Trump supposedly told Sondland there was "no quid pro quo."
The evidence increasingly suggests that call never happened.
justsecurity.org/67536/heres-th…

(•_•)
<) )╯UKRAINE
/ \
\(•_•)
( (> KNEW ABOUT
/ \
(•_•)
<) )> THE HOLD
/ \
nytimes.com/2019/12/03/wor…

If only some witness had explained to Congress why Zelensky would go along with Trump's claim that there was no pressure, while Castor sat right in front of them ...

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1194694447835025410?s=20

Taylor didn't replace Yovanovitch in Ukraine for a month. That month just happens to be right when the Three Amigos came in and started implementing Trump's corrupt scheme.

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1195435391458979846?s=20

Fiona Hill clearly explained the difference between the "regular" and "irregular" diplomatic channels in Ukraine:

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1197585883068850177?s=20

Castor: "The one witness who spoke to President Trump as a witness, Ambassador Sondland, said the president told him to cooperate and tell the truth."
Here's the list of witnesses the White House has blocked from testifying, even after they received congressional subpoenas:

Even by the standards of Republicans' own witness at the last hearing, Trump committed impeachable offenses:

Denying that Trump's demands were for his personal political gain requires denying or ignoring a mountain of public evidence of Trump's corrupt intent.

The defense of Trump relies an awful lot on claiming that words and demands with perfectly obvious meanings are actually ambiguous.
The call is unambiguous. Trump was demanding investigations of his political opponents.

Trump's defenders want us to believe the July 25 call shows no quid pro quo, as if the only way a crime could have occurred was if Trump explicitly called it a quid pro quo.
That's not how it works.

Castor claims that the administration has done its best to comply with Congress's investigation.
Then, he squirms and refuses to answer any questions about the various witnesses they blocked from testifying.

If Trump really cared about corruption, there were official channels he could have used to ask for an investigation.
Instead, he set up a workaround through Barr, Giuliani, and the Three Amigos.

Berke runs through the public record of Giuliani demanding investigations into the Bidens—which makes it excruciatingly clear that's what Trump wanted when he mentioned the Bidens, then told Zelensky to talk to Giuliani.

The evidence leaves no room for doubt: Trump delegated Rudy Giuliani to do his dirty work of pressuring the Ukrainian government to open an investigation into his political opponents.

It was the unanimous conclusion of everybody involved in aid to Ukraine—everybody except Trump—that the aid should be released.
The White House never even tried to give them an explanation otherwise.

It was clear to everybody that Trump's demands for an investigation into Burisma were actually about the Bidens—including the Ukrainians, who explicitly worried that they were being wrapped up in American domestic politics.

Castor has tried to muddy the waters on whether Trump wanted Zelensky to investigate the Bidens.
Fortunately, we don't have to read anything into the July 25 call to figure it out. Here he is saying it to reporters on the White House lawn:
cnn.com/videos/politic…

Castor recounts Senator Johnson saying Trump was "adamant, vehement, and angry" about the insinuation that there was a quid pro quo.
He's been adamant about lots of false things, such as saying he didn't have any business in Russia during the campaign.
nytimes.com/2018/11/29/us/…

Callen and Castor are lamenting that Republicans weren't allowed to ask Vindman whatever questions they wanted.
That was to stop them from using their time to try to out the whistleblower whose complaint kicked off the impeachment investigation.
vox.com/2019/11/13/209…

Callen and Castor sure spent a lot of time trying to argue that Sondland's testimony was unreliable.
If only there were a dozen other witnesses who told the same general story about Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine. intelligence.house.gov/report/

Goldman walks through the differences between Trump and Biden's actions in Ukraine—including the fact that Biden's actually made an investigation into the company for which his son worked *more* likely, not less.

House investigators didn't set out to find evidence of incriminating phone calls involving Nunes, Solomon, and others.
It was a natural consequence of their having phone calls with members of the president's scheme who were under investigation.

The House has compiled an overwhelming case against Trump despite unprecedented obstruction from the executive branch.

Goldman: Trump's demands for a public announcement of an investigation is "an indication he wanted the political benefit from them," not the actual anti-corruption benefits.

By the time Trump released the aid to Ukraine,
-The Washington Post had revealed the quid pro quo
-Congress had opened an investigation
-Congress was aware of the whistleblower complaint

The Trump campaign is, as we speak, selling shirts commemorating the time Chief of Staff/OMB Director Mick Mulvaney explicitly confirmed to reporters that Trump extorted Ukraine:

https://twitter.com/wsteaks/status/1204078287665999872

Why do House Republicans keep demanding Schiff testify? Why aren't they demanding testimony from Nunes, who was actually linked to the extortion scheme?
Simple: They don't actually think Schiff did anything wrong—except expose the president's wrongdoing.
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/the-b…

Castor and Chabot are running down evidence of corruption at Burisma that went uninvestigated.
They apparently missed the testimony from [checks watch] an hour ago about how Biden's work in Ukraine made an investigation of Burisma more likely, not less.

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1204121042689699841

Also, for the record: More than 50 percent of the country supports the current impeachment investigation, and has for more than two months.
vox.com/policy-and-pol…

.@RepCohen and Goldman run through the facts of Biden's work regarding Burisma and Ukraine, demonstrating that Biden—not Trump—was the one fighting the kind of corruption Chabot and Castor described in Ukraine.

@RepCohen In a criminal conspiracy, the person at the top often delegates responsibility—and blame—to those lower on the totem pole.
That sure sounds a lot like what Trump did with Giuliani and the Three Amigos.

@RepCohen "Who was the kingpin of that plan?
"President Trump."

Jordan, as always, takes off with a screed about the whistleblower.
Everything in their complaint has been corroborated.
npr.org/2019/11/09/776…

Then, he complains that there haven't been enough fact witnesses—while ignoring the fact that the White House is the one making sure that doesn't happen.
intelligence.house.gov/report/

And, of course, he runs through the same debunked talking points about how Trump's extortion scheme never happened.
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/debun…

(•_•)
<) )╯UKRAINE
/ \
\(•_•)
( (> DIDN'T
/ \
(•_•)
<) )> INTERFERE
/ \
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/debun…

Reminder: Trump wanted Ratcliffe to be Director of National Intelligence.
His nomination failed amid allegations he misrepresented his prosecutorial record.
If confirmed, he would have been, among other things, overseeing the whistleblower complaint.
cnn.com/2019/08/03/pol…

Goldman highlights a key point: The White House didn't give any explanation for why they were withholding aid from Ukraine until *after* The Washington Post revealed Trump's scheme to the public.

Goldman draws the distinction Trump's defenders refuse to see: If Trump was concerned about corruption, there was a process for voicing that concern before releasing aid. Instead, he went out of his way to circumvent that process—and never gave an explanation until he got caught.

Matt Gaetz delivered a rant about priorities Congress could be focusing on instead of impeachment.
@RepCicilline sets him straight on what Congress has tried to do on the fronts he identified, even while pursuing its investigation—but that the Senate still refuses to pass.

@RepCicilline .@RepSwalwell: "Let's talk about that anti-corruption president of ours."

@RepCicilline @RepSwalwell .@RepSwalwell: "'What did the president know and when did he know it?' There is a reason that no one here has repeated those questions during these hearings. We know what the president did. And we know when he knew it ... Trump knew everything."
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/trump…

@RepCicilline @RepSwalwell .@RepTedLieu: "The president's abuse of power is even worse than just using official duties for private gain. It is also just flat out illegal."
So much for the "you can't impeach a president who hasn't committed a crime" defense.

McClintock claims that the only evidence of Trump's corrupt intent is the word of his accusers.
That's not true.
Trump himself went out and confirmed that he wanted Zelensky to investigate the Bidens.
(Oh, and Mulvaney confirmed it, too.)
cnn.com/videos/politic…

Witnesses repeatedly described extensive notes that might help investigators.
The White House is making sure Congress doesn't see them.

Rep. Lesko: "Are you sick and tired of this impeachment sham?"
No—a majority of Americans still support impeachment, just as they have since October.
vox.com/policy-and-pol…

Lesko and Castor say that Biden sought to oust "the prosecutor that looked into Burisma."
That's false. Viktor Shokin specifically was *not* investigating Burisma, or really any corruption, for that matter—which is why Europe and the U.S. wanted him out. nytimes.com/2019/10/29/bus…

.@RepJayapal: "The first and best witness about the president's corrupt intent was Donald Trump."

@RepJayapal Trump's own administration believed that the things he was withholding, supposedly out of concerns about corruption, would actually have *helped* Ukraine fight corruption.

@RepJayapal "The sequence of events and all of the corroborating evidence makes it crystal clear that Trump didn't care about corruption at all. In fact, as he told us himself on national television, he simply cared about his own politically motivated investigations into his rival."

Reschenthaler cites reporting in The Hill as evidence that there was a Ukrainian plot to undermine Trump.
You know, The Hill, where John Solomon interviewed corrupt Ukrainian officials and ran his reporting by Lev Parnas before publication.
thedailybeast.com/biden-ukraine-…

Reschenthaler asks Castor to list flaws in the whistleblower complaint.
Castor cites questions about sources and a few minor quibbles—but nothing about the actual substance of the allegations against Trump.
That's because the complaint was accurate.
npr.org/2019/11/09/776…

"Duress would be a good word:" Goldman explains that Zelensky denying he was facing continued pressure from the White House is "similar to a hostage testifying under duress."

Note to Rep. Cline and Castor: Administration officials weren't upset that Trump didn't listen to their advice. They were upset that Trump overturned U.S. foreign policy to run a "domestic political errand" by extorting a foreign country for personal gain.

https://twitter.com/moscow_project/status/1197585883068850177

Goldman clarifies that the July 25 call is "direct evidence" of Trump's quid pro quo—and directly refutes at least three of the "four facts" Republicans are relying on to defend Trump are flat-out false.

There's abundant direct evidence of Trump's quid pro quo—and, no, drawing clear inferences from overwhelming evidence isn't disqualifying; it's what courts ask jurors to do every day.

One fact that is—or, at least should be—undisputed based on the evidence: Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Ukraine didn't.

.@RepJoeNeguse runs through four actual facts:
-Russia interfered in 2016
-Ukraine didn't
-Russia is pushing the Ukrainian interference conspiracy theory
-Russia benefits from an investigation into Ukraine

@RepJoeNeguse .@RepGregStanton and Goldman break down the right's process complaints one at a time:

@RepJoeNeguse @RepGregStanton There's only been one real breakdown in process: The Trump administration's refusal to cooperate with any congressional requests, including those by witnesses merely seeking to access their own records.

@RepJoeNeguse @RepGregStanton "It was quite clear they were trying to block every single witness."

@RepJoeNeguse @RepGregStanton "That's what the president wants, to delay this as long as possible"—all while he continues to abuse his office to pressure foreign governments to interfere in our democracy on his behalf.

Castor just recounted at length all of the people in both the Ukrainian and American governments who were uncomfortable with Trump's extortion scheme.
This is apparently a defense of Trump.
themoscowproject.org/dispatch/debun…

Trump has a bad habit of saying the quiet part out loud when it comes to inviting foreign countries to interfere in American elections.

Republicans have yet to present any evidence for their exculpatory rationales for Trump's decision to withhold aid from Ukraine.

Collins is right: It matters whether Ukraine understood that aid was withheld, and when.
They knew as early as late July, potentially even the day of Trump's call with Zelensky—and certainly long before it was publicly reported in late August. nytimes.com/2019/12/03/wor…

Collins just blatantly misrepresented the DOJ inspector general's report.
It actually found that the Russia investigation was *not* a politically-motivated hit job against Trump.
nbcnews.com/politics/justi…

And, by the way: The Page FISA warrant was *not* the basis of the Russia investigation. We've known that for almost two years.
nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/…

Nadler outlines what we know: "We know President Trump has put himself before this country."

Nadler closes: Republicans offered "no substantive word in the president's defense. I suspect that is because there is at base no real defense for the president's actions ... President Trump violated his oath to the American people."