What a coincidence! Thomas Barrack, another Trump “advisor” and chair of the Presidential Inaugural Committee has been arrested and charged with acting as a foreign agent.
This isn't actually a FARA violation. It's worse.
1/
22 USC 611 (FARA) is a documentary requirement and (if you lie) can carry a 5-year sentence.
Barrack was charged with the "espionage lite" statute for people working on behalf of a foreign power: law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18…
This one carries up to a 10-year penalty.
2/
One reason I said, "what a coincidence" is that this week I'm writing about Republican lawbreaking.
A foreign agent is someone working in the US but "subject to the direction or control of a foreign government."
This doesn't include consulates or officials. It's someone working in secret.
4/
If you're working in the US, but subject to the control of a foreign government, you're required to provide notification to the Attorney General.
Here's what's mind bending: The guy secretly working under the control of a foreign government was advising the US President.
5/
Barrack was working for not 1, not 2 . . . but 4 unnamed Emirati officials whose names are known to the grand jury.
And what did they have Barrack doing?
Among other things, influencing US foreign policy and "obtaining information" about US government positions.
6/
Just think how much easier it is to accomplish these goals if you're the Chair of the Presidential Inaugural Fund and an advisor to the United States president.
Whether or not Trump knew, he looks bad. Right?
7/
If he knew, then he's letting his staff secretly work for a foreign government. If he didn't know, he was a dupe.
One problem with all these crimes is that it's hard to focus on one. There are too many! It's dizzying! They all fade into a blur.
8/
None of them can sink the public consciousness. The Trump Org indictment was just a few weeks ago.
Compare that to the constant repetition of "her emails" -- a made-up crime. It was hammered so often that even those who know there was no crime feel a nagging doubt.
9/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The prosecution has everyone confused because they are framing the case as "election fraud" and "election interference" so everyone is trying to connect the crimes we know about to "election fraud."
This would be clear: "It is election fraud. Here is how the evidence will support a charge of election fraud." Then show how the behavior supports election fraud.
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.
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/
. . . 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:
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/