Thread by @SethAbramson

(THREAD) The so-called "Trump pee tape" is a subject of major-media and Congressional debate. Please SHARE this exhaustively researched FAQ.

Q1: Where does the so-called "pee tape allegation" come from?

A1: The allegation first appeared in the "Steele Dossier"—published by Buzzfeed in January 2017. It's now the subject of much public debate.

Q2: Who made the "pee tape" allegation?

A2: The allegation was first documented by Christopher Steele, the former head of the MI6's Russia desk. It comes from top Russian HUMINT.

Q3: Who are Steele's sources for this potentially very serious (and certainly very unusual) allegation? Do we know?

A3: Steele's dossier says (1) a member of the Ritz Moscow staff, and (2) a member of Trump's entourage, confirm the veracity of the claim.

Q4: Has Steele shared the names of his sources with anyone else? And are we saying that Trump's entourage spoke directly to Steele himself?

A4: Steele shared some—maybe all—his sources with Mueller, and *may* share them with the Senate. Trump's entourage spoke to Steele's source.

Q5: So what exactly is the "pee tape" allegation? Some media claim the allegation involves Trump himself performing a sex act. Is that true?

A5: No—the allegation is simply that Trump paid to watch several Russian prostitutes urinate on a bed Obama had slept in at the Ritz Moscow.

Q6: When is the so-called "pee tape" incident alleged to have happened?

A6: If it happened, the event occurred in the early morning hours following the 1AM after-party of the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow.

Q7: I'm uncomfortable with this topic and uncomfortable with the graphic atop this thread. Why should I care about this issue whatsoever?

A7: US—not UK—media is also uncomfortable with the topic, which is why they buried it until now. But it suggests Putin's blackmailing Trump.

Q8: But isn't the point here that we're judging Trump for a sexual proclivity? Why should I care—or judge—Trump for private sexual conduct?

A8: It's not "sexual" conduct. And no one cares about Trump's sex life—this *only* matters if Trump is being blackmailed with video of this.

Q9: Has the allegation that the FSB secretly videotaped Trump at the Ritz Moscow become a topic of public debate? Or is this a fringe topic?

A9: Steele's dossier is *heavily* relied upon by the FBI and Congress. All major media is discussing it. This allegation is its first pages.

Q10: Does Putin's FSB truly record people who stay at the Ritz Moscow? And why would they do that with a—in 2013—non-politician like Trump?

A10: The U.S. intel community confirms this is a *common* FSB—former KGB—tactic and that it is *regularly* used against U.S. businesspeople.

Q11: What would Putin hope to gain by videotaping Trump while he stayed at the Ritz Moscow in 2013? And would this sort of blackmail *work*?

A11: This tactic is *very* effective—*particularly* with vain men. By holding the video over Trump, Putin could encourage favorable conduct.

Q12: Presumably Trump denies this conduct, though, right?

A12: Absolutely—though he admits being videotaped in the Ritz Moscow on that night, and is reported to be obsessed with Steele's allegation.

Q13: Does Trump have an alibi for the alleged date and time that the FSB videotape was supposedly made? Has he ever attempted to offer one?

A13: He has no alibi and has never tried to offer one. But he *did* allow a Russian business partner—Emin Agalarov—to offer a *false* alibi.

Q14: Wait a minute—you're saying that Trump knowingly allowed a fabricated alibi to be given to the press and said nothing about it? Really?

A14: Yes. The allegation was that Trump engaged in this conduct the night of the 2013 Miss Universe pageant. Agalarov offered a false alibi.

Q15: Okay, what was the false alibi Trump's business partner Emin Agalarov offered for the so-called "pee tape incident" at the Ritz Moscow?

A15: Emin Agalarov said Trump was up at 7AM filming a music video with Emin that day, so he wouldn't have been up late with any prostitutes.

Q16: What's the problem with that alibi? And when was it offered?

A16: The event—if it happened—happened a day later. Trump sleeps 3-4 hours nightly. Emin offered the alibi *right* when the dossier dropped.

Q17: Has Trump offered any other explanations for why the so-called "pee tape incident" couldn't have happened? And are his claims credible?

A17: Yes—and absolutely not. Trump's only explanation for why it couldn't have happened is he's a germophobe—which itself is certainly true.

Q18: Why isn't Trump being a germophobe—which is confirmed to be true by multiple media sources—proof the pee-tape incident never happened?

A18: There's *no* allegation Trump touched any urine, and a germophobe would be *more* likely to order another to use urine to defile a bed.

Q19: Okay—but is it *credible* to think Trump hates Barack Obama enough to want to defile a bed the former president slept in with his wife?

A19: Every media source that's looked at the issue says Trump has hated Obama near-obsessively ever since Obama made fun of him at a dinner.

Q20: Wait—what dinner are we talking about, and how could one dinner so activate Trump's desire for revenge that he'd do something this odd?

A20: President Obama publicly *humiliated* Trump at the White House Correspondents' dinner in late April 2011—a defining moment for Trump.

Q21: Are we *sure* he was humiliated—and that this led to a desire to get revenge on Obama that would culminate in an event 30 months later?

A21: Per the Washington Post: "Reporters for major news organizations say Trump was so humiliated it triggered a deep yearning for revenge."

Q22: So that's it? Trump hired prostitutes to urinate on a bed for "revenge"? Does everyone agree with this assessment? Is it compelling?

A22: Some reporters don't agree. But either way, while Trump's hatred of Obama is documented—see Birtherism—this isn't the best explanation.

Q23: Acknowledging that the pee tape incident—if it happened—is petty and vengeful, and Trump is both things, what's a *better* explanation?

A23: That night Trump was partying—it's confirmed—with Russian businessmen who hated Obama and would've (like Trump) thought this hilarious.

Q24: But are Trump's Russian business partners really known for hiring Russian prostitutes and partying with them in hotels? Seems obscure.

A24: Actually, Trump's business contacts in that region are *well-known* for hiring prostitutes to attend their wild, post-business parties.

Q25: Do we know Trump was out late that night partying? And was this in fact a "post-business" party that would've been wild and—er—joyful?

A25: Yes, we know Trump was at the wee-hours, club-hosted pageant after-party. And he'd just closed *the biggest business deal of his life*.

Q26: Wait, you're saying Steele's sources claim this incident happened on the same night Trump closed the biggest business deal of his life?

A26: Media reports indicate Trump, Aras Agalarov, Sverbank's CEO, and Putin's permits man Vlad Kozhin agreed on Trump Tower Moscow that day.

Q27: Okay, you're going to have to say *much* more about how these four men managed to cut a deal on Trump Tower Moscow at the 2013 pageant.

A27: It takes 200+ tweets to explain the story—so it can't fit in this "FAQ" format—so please see this link instead. storify.com/wesmorgan1/get…

Q28: Does Trump concede his Ritz Moscow hotel room *was* under FSB video monitoring on the date and time the video was allegedly recorded?

A28: *Yes*. In a press conference after Buzzfeed published the dossier, Trump said he assumed his room was audio-/video-bugged on that trip.

Q29: If Trump knew he was being audio-/video-recorded at the Ritz Moscow, wouldn't he have made certain his behavior there was *impeccable*?

A29: That's exactly Trump's argument: he now says he was so sure he and his entourage were being bugged that he acted absolutely impeccably.

Q30: Do we have any evidence to contradict Trump's claim he was acting impeccably the night he concedes the FSB bugged his Ritz Moscow room?

A30 (KEY ANSWER): *Yes*. We have ample independent evidence suggesting that Trump lied about his conduct in Moscow on the night in question.

Q31: What's the evidence that Trump did *not* act—as he claims he did—absolutely impeccably on the night of the alleged "pee-tape incident"?

A31: Earlier that night, Trump propositioned Miss Hungary 2013 for sex—an adulterous liaison that would've taken place in his (bugged) room.

Q32: Wait a minute—you're saying there's proof the then-married Trump planned to have *adulterous sex* in a room he says he knew was bugged?

A32 (KEY ANSWER): Yes. Miss Hungary—unaware it mattered—made the allegation *before* Steele's dossier was published. huffingtonpost.com/entry/allegati…

Q33: Holy crap. Has President Trump ever *denied* Sarka's (Trump-excuse-busting) allegation? Has U.S. media ever even *asked* him about it?

A33: He's never denied it—never even been asked about it. Sarka hasn't been questioned by *either* U.S. media or the Senate Intel Committee.

Q34: So U.S. media—and Congress—keep calling the "pee tape" allegation "salacious" and "unverified," but they won't interview a key witness?

A34 (KEY ANSWER): *Yes*. Sarka can—*already has*—given the lie to Trump's claim about his behavior that night, yet no one's interviewed her.

Q35: Besides Kata Sarka, are there other witnesses—like Sarka, without any political motives—who bolster Steele's dossier on the "pee tape"?

A35 (KEY ANSWER): *Yes*. Including Sarka, there are at least *five witnesses* the media and Congress could speak to who corroborate Steele.

Q36: Let's start with Witness #2—after Miss Hungary 2013, Kata Sarka—who can bolster claims that the alleged "pee tape" blackmail is *real*.

A36 (KEY ANSWER): Per Paul Wood—the BBC's top Russia correspondent—an American Ritz Moscow guest alleges that prostitutes went to the room.

Q37: That's intriguing—a witness neither media nor the Senate has sought out who saw a fight over alleged prostitutes going to Trump's room.

A37 (KEY ANSWER): Not just "witness"—Paul Wood of the BBC says "hotel witnesses" (so at least two) who can "corroborate Steele's reporting."

Q38: Okay, so that's Kata Sarka and two BBC-reported witnesses (at *least*) who neither U.S. media nor Congress have sought. Are there more?

A38 (KEY ANSWER): *Yes*. Paul Wood spoke to *two* intelligence agency contacts (Witness #4 and Witness #5) who *confirm* Steele's reporting.

Q39: Tell me more about Witness #4 and Witness #5 in the alleged "pee tape incident."

A39 (KEY ANSWER): Paul Wood (BBC) says both a European intel agency chief and a CIA contact confirm a tape consistent with Steele's dossier.

Q40: So Witness #4 and Witness #5 are confirming a "pee tape" specifically?

A40 (KEY ANSWER): Yes and no. Two intel agencies say there's a "tape of sexual nature" from the Ritz Moscow on the date Steele has alleged.

Q41: So for all the claims of a Trump sex tape—and that being U.S. media's excuse for calling it too salacious to cover—that's not an issue?

A41 (KEY ANSWER): Yes. The reason the reports are of "tapes of a sexual nature" and not "sex tapes" is likely because urination *isn't* sex.

Q42: Okay, so now we have *four witnesses* who the media and Congress could speak to about Steele's "salacious" allegations and won't. More?

A42 (KEY ANSWER): *Yes*—there are more than five discoverable witnesses involved in the "pee tape allegation." Steele's dossier has another.

Q43: Who is "Witness #6" in the "pee tape allegation"?

A43 (KEY ANSWER): Per Steele, a Trump friend who appears to match the description of Sater, Epshteyn or Millian *knows* a "pee tape" exists.

Q44: Did this sixth potential "pee tape"-related witness speak *directly* to Steele about the existence of the tape? If so—why *would* they?

A44: Steele doesn't allege this. He says a man in Trump's 2013 Miss Universe pageant entourage spoke out of turn to a trusted Steele source.

Q45: Is Christopher Steele the sort of former MI6 agent who would have a source well-placed enough to get this info from a Trump confidant?

A45 (KEY ANSWER): Steele's Russia sources are so good Putin has had at least one—Erovinkin—killed. A spy expert calls Steele a "James Bond."

Q46: So why does all this matter? And why won't anyone in Washington or media investigate it? And why are we so uncomfortable discussing it?

A46: A Putin-blackmailed POTUS *can't be trusted*. Powerful Trump allies won't investigate it, as it *discredits the dossier* until proven.

Q47: And what about the media? NEWSWEEK may have just run a story on the "pee tape", but most won't touch it. *Why*? newsweek.com/trump-russia-g…

A47 (KEY ANSWER): It's a taboo topic because we're prudes. The media knows it—they don't want to lose viewers. See the pic atop this thread?

Q48: Wait—what's so important about the pic at the top of this thread? And by the way, why didn't you just choose, like, a picture of Trump?

A48: I was making a point. With the *security of America* on the line, we as citizens must now have the *courage* to discuss *urine* openly.

Q49: So the urine-themed pic atop the thread doesn't mean you're obsessed with urine, trying to make a joke of it, or simply have bad taste?

A49 (KEY ANSWER): If Putin is using a tape involving urine to *blackmail our president*, we have to love America enough to *speak of urine*.

Q50: Okay, so, brass tacks: what should we be doing now—given that Steele's dossier is atop the docket of both Congress and Mueller's probe?

A50 (KEY ANSWER): Media and Congress must *end* the embargo on pee tape discussion and *find the key witnesses we already know exist*. {end}

PS1: Whether you're comfortable with this thread or not, Steele and Mueller have *already discussed the pee tape*—we learned that this week.

PS2: We also learned this week that Steele will soon speak to the Senate Intel Committee. Its Dems (at least) *will* talk pee tape with him.

PS3: Because the "pee tape allegation" is the most salacious/hard to verify in the Steele Dossier, if it's verified it'll *rock* Washington.

PS4: That's why Trump and the GOP have told so many lies about Steele and his dossier and poked fun at the "pee tape." So: educate yourself!

PS5: All the facts we have now—added to Trump's consciousness of guilt-suggesting obsession with the pee tape—*bolster* the claim it exists.

PS6: If it exists, Putin *is* blackmailing the POTUS, the Steele Dossier is most likely true, and Trump has been lying to America on Russia.

PS7: So you better *believe* it matters whether Russian intelligence secretly possesses a tape of Trump with urinating Russian prostitutes.

PS8: Note too that Trump began publicly lying about even the *length* of his Moscow trip the moment Steele's "salacious" allegations arose.

PS9: Why would a president change his story from a sort of "lost weekend in Moscow" to a quick there-and-back trip? Because he acted badly.

PS10: Every fiber of my being as a former criminal attorney/investigator who represented *thousands* of defendants tells me the tape exists.

NOTE: If Steele's Ritz witness *isn't* Wood's—and if Wood's "multiple" hotel witnesses actually means "over two"—we could have 9+ witnesses.

NOTE2: So if you hear the GOP or media call the pee-tape allegation "unverified," remember they've *declined* to interview *any* witnesses.

NOTE3: Read the famous Rolling Stone piece about Trump's many inappropriate passes at Miss Universe contestants if you doubt Sarka's claim.

NOTE4: If you haven't read the "Steele Dossier"—now heavily relied upon by the FBI and Congress—you can see it here. documentcloud.org/documents/3259…