Teri Kanefield Profile picture
Sep 15, 2020 27 tweets 10 min read Read on X
(Thread) Hell Hath No Fury Like a Fixer Scorned

I finished Cohen’s book, and I’m ready with my Twitter Book Report.

The value of this book is that Cohen was a first-hand witness (with receipts) to TrumpWorld crimes.
1/ During Cohen’s 2-27-2019 Congressional testimony, Republicans hurled childish Trump-like insults at him.
politico.com/f/?id=00000169…

He looked them over and said⤵️

His book expands and explains.
2/ Cohen doesn’t expect us (liberals, Democrats, and Trump critics) to like him, but he hopes we’ll learn from his experience how TrumpWorld operates.

For 10 years, Cohen was an ‘active and eager participant’ in Trump’s ugly behavior:
3/ Cohen explains why people lie and cheat for Trump (Screenshot #1)

It's a Faustian bargain: Grovel at Trump's feet, and be rewarded with power, and invited into a world of wealth and glamour. (Screenshot #2)
4/ Cohen makes no excuses for himself (#1)

Cohen was susceptible to the allure of Trump-style power. Since childhood, he was fascinated by mobsters and attracted to their power and methods. He actually wanted to be a gangster – lawyer (#2 and #3)
5/ He explains how Trump brings people into his web of lies.

First Trump tells a lie. He knows it’s a lie. You know it’s a lie. If you go along, he has you. Then he tells another. He subtly signals what lie you're supposed to tell, and bestows his favor when you comply.
6/ Eventually people start believing their own lies because Trumpworld reinforces them.

To quote Yale Professor Timothy Snyder, Trump creates a story and forces us all to become actors in the play.

Trump has an “unerring eye” for the kind of person who he can reel in:
7/ Andrew McCabe, @PreetBharara and @Comey
described this same process: Trump tells a lie and invites you to join in.

Comey described it as Trump eating your soul in pieces:nytimes.com/2019/05/01/opi…

Comey, McCabe, and Bharara refused.
8/ They spoke the truth, so Trump set out to destroy them. @MichaelCohen212 accepted the lie in exchange for power. (I should have tagged MC in the first tweet) #1

Cohen became Trump's right-hand man because he was willing to lie and cheat (#2, #3, and #4)
9/ Cohen was amazed by Trump’s ability to lie to a person’s face. He described the acts Trump put on to win the Evangelical vote.

According to Cohen, Trump has no ideology other than accumulating wealth and power.

This, BTW, is exactly how @jasonintrator describes fascism.
10/ Fascism is all about hierarchy and power, and the cynicism of thinking that for everyone, it’s all about hierarchy and power.

Cohen describes how Trump employs fascists tactics, almost as if Trump and Cohen studied Stanley (but really, Stanley studied how fascists do it.)
11/ After explaining that Trump had no trouble cheating in the 2016 election or accepting help from Putin (which for Trump would have been “business as usual”) Cohen explains why Trump loves Putin. Read this entire passage (#1)

And also (#2)
12/ Yes, Trump is compromised.

Yes, Trump does Putin’s bidding willingly because he wants to.

Both of these things can be true, particularly if the compromising material consists of Trump’s willingness to secretly partner with Putin to promote Trump’s personal interests.
13/ The ending was quite dramatic: After ten years of loyalty and devotion, Cohen was arrested for crimes committed mostly while working for Trump, and actually committed at Trump’s direction.

The arrest took Cohen completely by surprise. I mean, he was shocked.
14/ It seems to have never occurred to Cohen that he was breaking laws.

I know that sounds stupid—he knew all along he was lying and cheating and hiding important stuff like payments to porn stars— but I’ve seen it before in my work as a defense lawyer . . .
15/ I recall sitting across the table from a man who said, “I knew I was pushing the envelope. But I had no idea I was violating 5 federal statutes.”

Part of the intoxication of being in Trump’s world was the feeling that rules don’t matter.
16/ Cohen describes the cynicism of thinking everyone cheats. If everyone cheats, the person prosecuted has been singled out for political reasons.

He thought he was targeted. If they got him (he thought) they can get anyone.

Narrator: Wrong! Most people don't do that⤵️crap!
17/ Trump’s response to Cohen’s arrest was a version of “I hardly know him.” Cohen was hurt and shocked.

The summer before Cohen told a Vanity Fair reporter that he would take a bullet for Trump.

“And I meant it,” Cohen wrote. “But not if Donald Trump pulled the trigger.”
18/ Cohen understood that Trump expected him to stay quiet, go to prison, and work on remaining in Trump’s good graces.

But Cohen—hurt and angry by Trump’s reaction—walked.

He cooperated with Mueller and testified under oath before Congress.
19/ He also describes how prison guards, who were pro-Trump (and took the cue from Trump) found little ways to make him miserable in prison, for example, shining a light on him every half hour when he was trying to sleep.
20/ Cohen describes the moment when he was unfairly slapped back in jail in a clear case of retaliation when he would not assure the Barr-DOJ that he would not publish a tell-all book. The judge released him after finding that the DOJ’s treatment of him was “retaliatory.”
21/ This is the book Trump didn’t want released.
22/ $ Millions.

Cohen was a successful personal injury lawyer before meeting Trump. This moved him into a whole new world.

As a fringe benefit, he loved being part of the thrilling jet-setting glamorous world of high stakes and power.

He's sorry now.

23/ I can say confidently after having read the book that the mention of blood was metaphoric.


I see in Michael Cohen a weak and limited person who was unable to withstand evil. (Are my years as a defense lawyer showing?)
24/ I think this is correct: The hold he has on them is essentially their own weakness, which means he gets control of people unable to wrest free.

He eats their souls.
The problem goes back pretty far in human history.
This thread is a blog post, here: terikanefield-blog.com/hell-hath-no-f…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Teri Kanefield

Teri Kanefield Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Teri_Kanefield

Mar 11
Finished. (Whew)

As promised, all about Legal pundits and the Outrage Industry, with a few cherished conspiracy theories carefully debunked.

Click here to start:

For years, I was perplexed by what I saw on Twitter. . .

1/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
It seemed to me that the dynamics of social media were making people more authoritarian.

Then I started reading experts in political communication and it all started making sense.


2/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
I wrote parts 1 - 5 in November. I thought I was finished, but I wasn't.

There were still things I didn't understand.

Writers often write to understand, so I kept reading, thinking, and writing.



3/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
Read 5 tweets
Mar 9
Whew! I finished.



Everything I promised: How to listen (or not listen) to legal pundits.

It's also about what is dangerous about the entire industry of punditry, speculation, and cable talk shows.

1/terikanefield.com/invented-narra…

For years I was perplexed by what I was seeing on left-leaning Twitter, political blogs, and partisan reporting.

I had the feeling that, in its way, what I was seeing was comparable to Fox: Lots of bad information and even unhinged conspiracy theories.
2terikanefield.com/invented-narra…
Of course, if I suggested that, I was blasted for "both-sidesing."

Then I discovered an area of scholarship: Communications and the overlap between communications and political science.

I read these books and light bulbs went on.

3/ Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 2
If Trump can win with everything we know about him, what make people think a finding of guilt would change that?

It makes no sense.
Also what if the jury acquits? It can happen.

I do recall the same people thought impeachment and indictment would cause Trump to crumble.
Another contradiction: when people demanded indictments RIGHT NOW (in 2021 and early 2022) the reason was, "Everyone knows he's guilty! Look at all the evidence!"

We saw the J6 committee findings.

Trump isn't saying "I didn't do it." He's saying, "I had the right to do it."

2
We all know what he did. The question is, "Do people want a president who acts like Trump?"

A lot of people do.

People show me polls that a guilty finding would change minds.

I say rubbish. Use common sense. He lost in 2020 and he lost the popular vote in 2016. . .

3/
Read 6 tweets
Feb 29
The news takes 2 minutes to convey.

"Here is what the court did." That is news.

Listening to people speculate about why the court did it and what it means is not news.

It is entertainment.

But it is a special kind of entertainment.

1/
. . . because it is designed to keep people hooked. People need to stay glued to the screen for hour after hour.

But to hook people, you need to scare them. The Facebook whistleblower testified that content that produces strong emotions like anger gets more engagement.

2/
Fox does the same thing. There is a few minutes of news, but the facts get lost as commentators and TV personalities speculate and scare their audiences.

Before you yell at me for comparing MSNBC to FOX, read all of this:

3/terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Read 5 tweets
Feb 29
If I write another blog post addressing the outrage cycle here on Twitter and in the MSNBC ecosystem, it will be to explore why so many people who believe they are liberal or progressive actually want a police state.

1/
Today alone, a handful of people who consider themselves liberal or progressive told me that the "traitors need to be arrested and prosecuted."

In 2019, back when I wore myself out tamping down misinformation, I explained the legal meaning of treason.

2/
Back then, I now realize, people asked politely: "Can Trump be prosecuted for treason (over the Russia election stuff).

I explained that wouldn't happen.

Now it's different. It's more like fascist chants.

3/
Read 4 tweets
Feb 29
I spent 5 years writing FAQ pages and "talking people off the ledge" each time there was a collective meltdown.

I stopped doing that because it is never-ending.

I keep saying the same things over and over.

1/
In 2021, when people were demanding indictments, I said, "Indictments are the start of a long harrowing process."

I explained that trials are harrowing.

Judges make bad decisions.

Juries don't always get it right. A person can be guilty but be acquitted.

2/
I told people to stop thinking that the criminal justice system will solve a political problem.

Eventually, I came to believe that the 10% of people who are "highly engaged" with politics are the least informed.

They will always be in a misinformation-outrage cycle.

3/
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(