Thread by @SethAbramson

Trump has a 40-year history of never participating in a trial whose outcome he doesn't know in advance

If there's any chance the outcome of a trial is a loss he settles

In other words between McConnell and Pelosi only Pelosi has the green light to negotiate the terms of a trial

The idea that Trump wanted a long trial was always a farce and a lie that the media bit on

Trump knows this is a fake political trial and under no circumstances was he ever going to allow it to be a real trial

He has given McConnell absolutely *no* room to maneuver or negotiate

A man who lies habitually about his willingness to testify at trials or speak to investigators or allow witnesses to testify who he knows he could block from testifying is not a guy who is privately saying yes I would like a really long trial with lots of unpredictable witnesses

Strategically Pelosi should hold the articles until such time as the question of whether the Senate trial will be a real trial is out of Trump's hands because so much damning evidence has emerged that at least 4 moderate GOP senators have publicly stated this will be a real trial

My point is, the moment the jury foreman told America he was being controlled 100% by the defendant (a defendant who we already know has a 40-year history of only participating in rigged trials) the open question of whether there could ever be a meaningful Senate trial was closed

And media is mistaken if it thinks there's *any connection whatsoever* between the urgency the House rightly felt in indicting the president and putting him on notice that his behavior is impeachable and the urgency *anyone* should feel rushing toward a wholly political acquittal