Thread by @moscow_project

Today: The case for Trump's abuse of power.
.@RepAdamSchiff begins with the CrowdStrike conspiracy theory Trump wanted investigated, which originated with Russia and has been repeatedly debunked.

@RepAdamSchiff This is not the first time Trump solicited interference on his behalf in a presidential election: He was even more public about doing so in 2016, when he called on Russia to hack his opponent's emails.

@RepAdamSchiff Trump received talking points before the July 25 call. They were about fighting corruption in Ukraine.
Trump disregarded them to demand Ukraine investigate Russian conspiracy theories that benefited him personally.

@RepAdamSchiff Having been promised an investigation into one conspiracy theory, Trump demanded another, into debunked allegations against one of his main political rivals.

@RepAdamSchiff The day after his call with Zelensky, Trump had a second phone call, this one with Gordon Sondland.
That drove it home: Trump didn't care about Ukraine; he only cared about the "big stuff" that would help him in 2020.

@RepAdamSchiff "Those three days in July tell so much of the story. This course of conduct alone should astound all of us who value the sanctity of our elections and who understand that the vast powers of the presidency are reserved only for actions which benefit the country."

@RepAdamSchiff Damning as they are, those three days are only part of the story.
The whole story is a months-long effort to extort Ukraine, threatening to sell them out unless they helped Trump cheat to win the 2020 election.

@RepAdamSchiff To the "Three Amigos," the nature of Trump's request was clear: It was a quid pro quo, working with Rudy Giuliani to solicit Ukraine's help in the 2020 election.

@RepAdamSchiff In a July 10 meeting where Sondland explained the quid pro quo, John Bolton objected and instructed Fiona Hill to speak with the NSC's lawyers.
The Senate must hear their testimony and see their documents to do fair, impartial justice.

@RepAdamSchiff Trump's defenders want to make impeachment all about the call.
Incriminating as it is, that's only a small piece of what we know about Trump's months-long scheme to extort Ukraine to help him cheat American democracy. themoscowproject.org/dispatch/debun…

@RepAdamSchiff Texts from August make it painfully clear how explicitly—and for how long—Trump's goons, from Giuliani on down, were pushing Ukraine to help him cheat in the 2020 presidential election.

@RepAdamSchiff .@RepAdamSchiff: "The president and his allies have offered no explanation for this effort, except: The president can abuse his office all he likes, and there's nothing you can do about it. Can't indict him, can't impeach him."

@RepAdamSchiff The quid pro quo wasn't just about a White House meeting.
It was also about withholding $391 million of Congressionally-appropriated and -mandated security assistance—with no explanation to the rest of the U.S. government except that the president wanted it done.

@RepAdamSchiff Trump repeatedly signed off on aid to Ukraine in 2017 and 2018.
In 2019, there was only one difference: an upcoming election he wanted Ukraine to help him cheat to win, and a political opponent he wanted attacked.

@RepAdamSchiff Trump's actions weren't just immoral; as the GAO concluded just last week, they were also clearly illegal.

@RepAdamSchiff Thanks to recently released emails, we know that the Trump administration knew full well that what they were doing was illegal.
That is why the Senate needs documents and witness testimony for a fair trial: to complete the picture the White House has tried to stop from emerging.

@RepAdamSchiff "Jurors all over America are told you don't leave your common sense at the door."
The Senate must not, either. The Ukrainians, who understood full well what Trump was demanding of them and why he was demanding it, certainly didn't.

@RepAdamSchiff Ambassador Bill Taylor's testimony made one thing incredibly clear: Trump didn't want Zelensky to investigate because he cared about corruption; he only wanted the announcement, because it would hurt his political opponents.

@RepAdamSchiff At the time, Trump's best defense, delivered by Gordon Sondland, was that Trump just "wants to get something" before signing a check for military aid—in other words, that he was withholding an official act in exchange for personal benefit.

@RepAdamSchiff Since being caught red-handed, the Trump administration has offered numerous shifting defenses.
Not one of them actually holds up.

@RepAdamSchiff If Trump only withheld aid to fight corruption, why did everybody involved work so hard to hide that reason from the world?
The answer is simple: because it's not true.

@RepAdamSchiff Trump's own chief of staff confirmed the quid pro quo, and told the American public to "get over it."
The Senate can't do that. The Senate "cannot allow a president to withhold military aid from an ally at war for illicit help in an election campaign."

@RepAdamSchiff If the Senate does not hold Trump accountable for what he's done, they will be opening the door for all kinds of future corruption, all under the same banner: Trump got away with it; why can't I?

@RepAdamSchiff Trump's scheme to extort a foreign government to help him cheat the 2020 election was days away from succeeding, except for one thing: He got caught.

@RepAdamSchiff "If President Trump is not held to account, we send the message to future presidents, future Congresses, and generations of Americans that the personal interests of the president can fairly take precedent over those of the nation."

@RepAdamSchiff Autocrats around the world—including Vladimir Putin—want nothing more than to see the U.S.'s example of democracy die, to replace with their own corrupt principles.
The Senate must not allow that to happen.

@RepAdamSchiff "A president has the right to hold a call with a foreign leader...He does not have the right to withhold official acts to secure assistance, and he certainly does not have the right to undermine our elections and place our security at risk for his own personal benefit."

@RepAdamSchiff No president has ever unilaterally withheld all documents and blocked so many witnesses from testifying—all to protect himself and his corrupt schemes.

@RepAdamSchiff "No other American could use the vast powers and levers of his government to conduct a corrupt scheme to benefit themselves and then use those same powers to suppress evidence .. Not a police chief, not a mayor, not a governor, not any elected official in the country."

@RepAdamSchiff This isn't just a routine dispute between the branches of government. It is a coverup that clearly shows the president's consciousness of guilt ...

@RepAdamSchiff ... and a direct affront to the Constitution that seeks to nullify any accountability and render the president above the law.

@RepAdamSchiff "The damage this president has done to our relationship with a key strategic partner will be remedied over time...if we fail to act, the damage to our elections, to our national security, to our system of checks and balances will be long lasting and potentially irreversible."