Thread by @SethAbramson

Per the Proof series, Trump's Saudi ally, MBS, has in the past engaged in election interference operations that were calibrated to appear to be by his enemies in Iran. The most sensible explanation is that these pro-Trump calls in Florida were *Saudi* interference pinned on Iran.

The Saudis appear to have interfered when Trump pal Netanyahu was last up for re-election. At the time, they engaged in ambiguous actions that *aided Netanyahu* but could be *pinned* on Iran—because they could be falsely framed as benefitting Netanyahu's opponent. Sound familiar?

So it would be in keeping with pro-Trump Saudi intel operations to 1) threaten violence against Democratic voters, 2) leave signatures suggesting the interference was by the Iranians and 3) do so in a way that left Team Trump with plenty of room to frame the actions as pro-Biden.

When Ratcliffe first announced that the only interference happening was by Russia and China and Iran—and that the latter two nations were aiding Biden—I said that, per the evidence, China wants Trump to win (an increasingly mainstream view) and that Saudi interference was coming.

In Israel, the Saudis used Israeli cyberintelligence tools they'd gotten from Netanyahu's government to hack the phone of Netanyahu's opponent—who was less hostile to Iran than Netanyahu. The signature left on the hack suggested it was the Iranians, which made no sense to anyone.

Though one *could've* argued that the Iranians hacking only one of two Israeli candidates meant they considered that candidate the greater threat to Iran—which in Israel would be a *boost* to that candidate—Netanyahu said the attack meant his opponent was "weak on cybersecurity."

So the Saudi election operation in Israel was genius, because it 1) got information that could be helpful to Netanyahu, 2) gave Netanyahu a line of attack against his opponent, 3) falsely pinned it on the Iranians. The pro-Trump calls in Florida bear the same strategic signature.

In Florida, the calls 1) aided Trump, 2) could be *framed* by Trump as pro-Biden, 3) were pinned on the Iranians. Remember, MBS wants and needs America to see Iran as an election-interfering enemy—both to cover his own election interference and to advance his geopolitical agenda.

When Ratcliffe gave no indication that Saudi election interference could be anticipated—despite the Saudis having interfered in '16, according to the NYT—I knew something was off. Ratcliffe is now sticking with his implausible narrative that the Saudis have no interference plans.

Lest you doubt that the Saudis have access to the top intel tools in the world—including tools that can create fake signatures linking their actions to the Iranians—remember that they got these tools from Trump's allies in Israel as part of the "grand bargain" Trump is a part of.

The possibility always remains that the Iranians have suddenly decided to interfere in our elections, and that the Saudis have suddenly decided to *stop* interfering in our elections, and that calls threatening *Democratic voters* are pro-Biden.

But at some point, Occam's Razor?