Share this page!

Seth Abramson Profile picture
Twitter logo
8 Feb, 6 tweets, 2 min read
(ICYMI) PROOF offers the most comprehensive analysis of Trump's January 6 incitement-to-insurrection speech of any outlet in the United States. Below is Part II of the epic deconstruction (with a link to Part I).

Part III—the final part—drops later today. sethabramson.substack.com/p/a-comprehens…
(PS) Because this project is massive in scope—requiring more than 12 hours of labor—it's for full subscribers to the site. A PROOF subscription is $5/month, the lowest rate Substack lets columnists charge. sethabramson.substack.com
(PS2) I'd caution House managers not to over-focus on the word "fight"—the battlefield Trump wants (though it's not a great one for him). Equally big, as PROOF points out in its factual/legal analysis, are the words "stop," "we," "Capitol," and Trump's encouragement of trespass.
(PS3) I think Trump's new brief makes a *huge* error in saying that Trump didn't encourage *any* "criminal action." His encouragement of criminal trespass at the Capitol—the crime most insurrectionists were charged with—is what led to the violence inside the Capitol. Here's why:
(PS4) When you command people to trespass at a location *you know is defended by law enforcement*, you're *inciting violence* by *inciting trespass* because *the trespass can't be accomplished without violence*. See how that works?

This is a critical argument for House managers.
(PS5) Nothing could be more *commonsensical*—or contrary to the false claims in Trump's latest brief. If I know a building is closed to the public and actively defended by law enforcement and I incite you to get inside that building, I am responsible for the violence that ensues.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson 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 @SethAbramson

Seth Abramson Profile picture
10 Feb
Here's the other video of Alexander marching on January 6. In this light the coat looks black, so I'll correct myself and say Alexander appears to have been in one outfit, with—maybe—a sport coat beneath his jacket that he later appeared in, in a video taken far from the Capitol.
(PS) The important questions remain: 1) Why did Alexander leave the Capitol to film from far away (i.e. at what point did he decide to desert the march he organized and the Capitol stage he set up); 2) why does Jones say Trump is coming? Paul Escandon says Jones knew he wasn't.
(PS2) So Jones is consistent: he consistently says the White House told him Trump was going to the Capitol, from three days before January 6 all the way through 2PM on January 6. And Jones clearly believed the Stop the Steal stage is where Trump was headed. Paul Escandon demurs.
Read 11 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
10 Feb
On Ali Alexander: everyone agrees—see any media outlet, or Alexander's own statements—Alexander is in hiding and his whereabouts unknown. The Fort-Worth Star Telegram said on February 2 that the FBI would neither confirm nor deny investigating Alexander. star-telegram.com/news/local/for…
(PS) The problem is that the FBI never confirms or denies investigations (unless it's Comey doing so as to to Hillary). Alexander himself claims to be the star witness of the events of January 6. So yes, that the FBI is looking for him is certain. The chance they aren't is zero.
(PS2) If I had a significantly dimmer view of the FBI than I do—and my view at this point is mixed—I suppose I'd entertain the possibility that the FBI does not want to speak to the star witness in its case. But I don't, and therefore I'm not going to indulge such ridiculousness.
Read 5 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
10 Feb
Does anyone know if the man in the green circle is Ali Alexander? Image
(PS) I ask this because I *know* the below is Ali Alexander. If the above is also, it means Alexander changed clothes and hid his face to go to the Capitol. That'd be telling.
(PS2) I ask the question above earnestly. Alex Jones and Ali Alexander were supposed to speak at the front of the Capitol. Here's a picture of Jones at the front of the Capitol just feet away from someone who may be Alexander—I'm merely asking if anyone has seen a report on this.
Read 7 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
10 Feb
BREAKING NEWS: The Director of "The Steal", An Apologia for the Stop the Steal "Movement," Now Says Alex Jones—Present at Trump's Ellipse Speech—Lied to His Viewers and Capitol Police About Having Been Told Before the Ellipse Speech That Trump Would Speak at the Capitol Afterward Image
(PS) Paul Escandon just became a federal witness, as I understand federal investigations from having been involved in them as an investigator for a federal public defender in the past. I'm not saying he did anything wrong; he's just due an investigative visit by the FBI and ASAP.
(PS2) For any dizzy at this new development, it suggests the following: the three lead organizers of the Stop the Steal "movement"—Roger Stone, Ali Alexander, and Alex Jones—were hiding things from one another (and then the police) about their communications with the White House.
Read 8 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
8 Feb
What? What is Schumer *doing*? You don't *ever* have jurors vote on a dispositive question at the *start* of a trial, as you thereby insure that they will pay virtually *no attention whatsoever* thereafter, having already decided the trial ought not proceed in the first instance.
(PS) To those saying "they already voted on that," my understanding is the prior, Rand Paul-demanded vote was a vote to proceed to an argument on the constitutional question, not a vote on the question itself.

Still, this vote benefits Trump—a lot—if he can get 34 or more votes.
(PS2) There's no question the majority of the Senate will vote that the trial is constitutional—that's not the issue. The issue is that if 34 or more Republicans vote to stop the trial they'll be able to spend the entirety of the trial calling everything Democrats do meaningless.
Read 4 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
7 Feb
(UPDATE) Roger Stone has called me a "lying scumbag" on Gab for linking to major-media reports—including videos—detailing things he did. In one video, Stone raises money online for "protective equipment" for insurrectionists—exactly what his friend Ethan Nordean was arrested for.
(PS) I've been in touch with one of Stone's attorneys repeatedly across the years (beginning in 2018, I believe it was). If that attorney wishes to contact me via DM with a statement from Stone as to any fact I've gotten wrong, I'll be happy to publish Stone's statement on PROOF.
(PS2) My only interest—ever—is the truth, which is why I use only major-media reports and hard evidence (like videos Stone features in) when I'm stating facts. As a curatorial journalist, that's how I work. But I'm happy to publish a Stone statement if I've gotten a *fact* wrong.
Read 6 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

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

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @SethAbramson has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @SethAbramson!

Read all threads by @SethAbramson