Thread by @sethjlevy

Here is my view of where we came from and where we are.

From right after Trump’s victory in 2016 the American public was inundated with “reporting” about Trump’s potential collusion with Russia. 1/13

https://twitter.com/walkafyre/status/1459036383994163203

Many Trump supporters immediately rejected the notion based on our views of Trump and our understanding of how he played the game of politics, ongoingly baiting the other side into growing levels of insane analysis of him and his motives. 2/13

However, they had the supposed evidence and at that point we had effectively seen none of it.

From that point on, as every drip of information came out, this corner of Twitter grabbed onto it like dogs on a bone. Chewing through it and seeking to interpret how it fit. 3/13

This was often a combination of researching details and fitting each piece into the larger mosaic.

Early on we relied on the work of Devin Nunez and Kash Patel because effectively every news organization, often even Fox and folks like McCarthy, were spewing COLLUSION! 4/13

The behavior of “news” organizations like Fox even forced us to become our own daily analysts of current events like the firing of James Comey.

All of that then led to the period of the Mueller special counsel. 5/13

During that time we had factions both analyzing the details of the collusion claims and of the Spygate discoveries as well as speculating about Mueller’s motivations and the likely outcomes of the special counsel. 6/13

Mueller then wrapped and concluded there was no evidence of collusion, as we all knew.

That then flowed into the Durham appointment which allowed us to really lean into the Spygate details.
7/13

Some in this corner have such a mastery of the details that it blows my mind. I’m much more of a big picture guy.

Where we often butt heads is out of an abundance of details where there are just enough missing details to allow for distinct analytical conclusions. 8/13

This brings us to the here and now.

My view of where we are is that we effectively know everything that could be known based on publicly available information. Our services are much less necessary at this point.

The events we are analyzing have concluded. 9/13

This corner was a bridge but we are now on the far shore.

The person driving this bus at this point is Durham. He will let us know what there is to know in his time.

What is left is analysis (speculation) of where Durham is headed and how he will get us there. 10/13

As @walkafyre is noting, there are many possible outcomes. Different people in this corner have different interpretations of what is known and, as a result, different conclusions.

Arguing about those differences is natural but in the end make little difference. 11/13

Durham will proceed and eventually wrap up and at that point he will write a report. Only then will we truly know who was “right” or “wrong”.

That time is drawing near. Will it be one month, six months, one year or longer? 🤷‍♂️ 12/13

Even then there will be differing conclusions about what Durham should have done or could have done. We will likely disagree with some of his conclusions.

But as I said, at this point he has so much more information than we do that we are at a distinct disadvantage. 13/13