"Working relationship" means "repeat his lies."

That's Trump's role. He signals the lies and the entire right-wing falls in line.

The latest lie is that the J6 committee is illegitimate.

Now Kevin McCarthy is repeating that lie, even though he knows it's a lie.

1/
In his executive privilege lawsuit, made the [bogus] argument that the J6 committee is illegitimate.

It doesn't matter that the lie lost in court: Trump succeeded in signaled the lie.

Now Kevin McCarthy is repeating the lie.

2/

Now we the argument that the committee is illegitimate repeated in all the challenges to the J6 subpoenas and other lawsuits.

In his testimony before Congress and his book, @MichaelCohen212 explained how Trump signals the lie people are supposed to tell.

3/
“Mr. Trump did not directly tell me to lie to Congress,” Cohen said. “That’s not how he operates.”
politico.com/f/?id=00000169…

How does he operate?

Cohen offered an example. . .

4/
During the campaign, while Cohen was negotiating with Russia on Trump’s behalf (to build Trump Tower Moscow), Trump often asked how the negotiations were going.

Other times Trump looked Cohen in the eye and say, “there’s no business in Russia.”
politico.com/f/?id=00000169…

5/
Afterwards Trump went out and told the same lie to the American people.

Cohen thus understood that “there’s no business in Russia” was the lie he was supposed to tell.”

A cherished theory is that Lindsay Graham is compromised or blackmailed.

The theory misses the point.

6/
It's also a kind of projection. People who aren't of the right-wing mindset can't imagine any other reason a person would go from telling the truth and criticizing Trump to kissing his ring and repeating his lies.

They're not compromised. They fall in line. It's what they do.
7/
Paxton explains.

They fall in lockstep. They even like their own "uniform" or identifying piece of clothing. MAGA hats, anyone?

Authoritarians like to line up behind an authority.
That's one of their advantages.

Non-authoritarians tend to splinter. Notice that?

8/
Trump's lawsuits serve the purpose of signaling the lie and that's why it doesn't matter if they lose.

He lost all those election fraud lawsuits, but the lie lives on. The idea is that if you repeat the lawsuit often enough, people think it's true.

"Her emails!"

It works.

9/
The select committee wonders if someone told Kevin McCarthy what lie to tell - but that's not how Trump operates.

He looks people in the eye and lies and they know they're supposed to repeat it.

Andy McCabe, @PreetBharara, and @Comey described this same process.

10/
In his book, Disloyal, @MichaelCohen212 explained that he was amazed by Trump’s ability to lie to a person’s face.

It's a neat trick.

You can reject science, be unable to control a virus, and unable to build anything, but if you control the narrative, people think you can.

11/
That's what Trump does. He can't control anything real. As a business person, he couldn't add value. He couldn't build anything. As president, he was helpless in the face of a virus he couldn't control.

But he shamelessly tells compelling lies


12
You're all very sweet to overlook the errors and get my meaning anyway.

I have various theories for why this happens: My keyboard hates me. My keyboard is haunted by gremlins. Not enough morning coffee yet.

Or maybe I just type too fast?

13/
That was my favorite error in the whole thread. 🏆

I was busy thinking about how all those lawsuits repeat the same lie, and they get repeated naturally because when a new witness files a lawsuit, they look to see what the others argued yadda yadda yadda.
The blackmail theory assumes that facts matter to these people, or that anyone in the Fox bubbles cares about crimes.

They're scared of Trump, but not because he has secrets.

They're scared he'll ruin their careers or unleash a violent mob on them.
I've also wondered this.

It has also occurred to me that making him a poor man would be more effective than putting him in prison (which tends to rile supporters).

I gave up on the poor-man idea because he's too good at swindling and grifting.

This ⤵️ is so different from being afraid of blackmail, which assumes the existence of objective facts and provable truths.

For those who reject the idea of objective facts (the idea that underlies rule of law) truth is whatever the Leader says it is.

• • •

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

13 Jan
Here's seditious conspiracy: law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18…

🔹Two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,

🔹Conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States (OR levy war)
🔹OR to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof.
Treason is almost impossible to charge. It's defined in the Constitution as ⤵️ and the Supreme Court has said that the "enemy" must be a country in which we are at open war--meaning a war declared by Congress.
Read 17 tweets
11 Jan
Check this out.

#1: "Criminal investigators" in Georgia were "working to build a line of communication with congressional investigators."
cnn.com/2021/09/17/pol…

#2 is from the select committee website.
january6th.house.gov/about

1/
I read these as saying that the select committee is working with anyone else investigating the January 6 attack so that the work can build on one another to avoid duplication of effort.

2/
DOJ lawyers represented the National Archives in Trump's executive privilege lawsuilt, arguing alongside the select committee lawyers.

See where I am going with this?

Yes, it's 3 separate investigations.
But they're coordinating to avoid duplication of effort.

3/
Read 4 tweets
10 Jan
My latest for The Washington Post:

Perspective | The First Amendment may not help Jan. 6 defendants as much as they think it will.

Garland’s speech last week contained a warning that prosecutors will parry free-speech arguments.
washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/0…
1/
Garland told his audience that he has his sights on all the perpetrators.

He also (interestingly) launched into a discussion about the First Amendment.

We've seen the First Amendment defense repeatedly from those fighting subpoenas or dealing with indictments.

2/
When Trump faced trial in the Senate after his second impeachment for inciting a riot, he used a First Amendment Defense.

Giuliani used a First Amendment defense against Swalwall's lawsuit accusing him of (among other things) inciting a riot.)

3/
Read 23 tweets
9 Jan
There are a few assumptions in here.

Assumptions:

(1) The DOJ is waiting for a referral
(2) The DOJ is not working in coordination with the select committee
(3) The DOJ is doing nothing

I mean, other than that . . . 🤷‍♀️

1/
While the select committee has said it will make referrals where it deems them appropriate, I haven't heard anything about the DOJ "waiting" for a referral.

The select committee has said that it is working in coordination with other agencies to avoid duplication of effort.

2/
We know that the Georgia DA is coordinating with the select committee. Why not the DOJ also?

We also know that the DOJ lawyers represented the National Archives in Trump's executive privilege lawsuit.

3/
Read 19 tweets
6 Jan
This is also Merrick Garland's argument and approach: Fight authoritarianism with rule of law, not more authoritarianism.

Save democracy with more democracy, not less.

h/t @TWLadyGrey

1/
From @magi_jay's essay ⤵️

Some of Garland's critics see rule of law and commitment to the slow, grinding proceduralism of democracy as weakness.

Some can conceive of no possible motive other than corruption. "Garland must be bought off! Nobody can be so weak."

2/
It is also the approach of @BarackObama which makes sense because, as @magi_jay points out, this is the approach of the Democratic Party.

Obama says the cure to an ailing democracy is more democracy (by which he means civic engagement).

3/
Read 8 tweets
6 Jan
Here's why I think the answer is yes:

In its docs, the J6 committee said they're coordinating with other agencies to avoid duplication of effort.

We know they're coordinating with GA, which confirms (1).

In the exec. privilege docs, we see they have access to that evidence.
Randall also answered the question, so I'll drop his answer here:
I hesitate to speculate about the motives for some of the attacks, but I have noticed that some accounts achieved fame by attacking Trump. There is something appealing about attacking and being the "opposition" party and going after those in power.
Read 5 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

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(