So Trump's data company, Cambridge Analytica, at best unethically and at worst illegally took Facebook user data for a microtargeting operation, then willfully or negligently let the Russians access the info—which was then weaponized. Do I have that right? money.cnn.com/2018/07/17/tec…
2/ Obviously Trump Jr.'s "I love it" was collusion, and GOP operative Aaron Nevins colluded with Russia, and Trump adviser Erickson colluded with the Russians, and Trump adviser Papadopoulos—and Trump through Papadopoulos—did, and Carter Page and Manafort, so now this too, right?
3/ If your campaign steals voters' data via social media and then allows the Russians to access it and weaponize it, what in the *world* would that be called *besides* "collusion"? How do GOP Congressmen continue to say with a straight face, "we've seen no evidence of collusion"?
2/ NBC reported months ago that Trump privately told friends on the phone that he would be in trouble if one person in particular flipped: Manafort. If that news does break in the next few days, I don't know what the hell Trump will do. He seems to think it'd be curtains for him.
3/ Wouldn't it be crazy if Manafort were one of the "U.S. Persons" in the Butina affidavit, which would mean he was secretly working for the Russians for months *before* joining the Trump campaign—which I'd then bet some of the people who hired him knew at the time?
(THREAD) This thread unpacks the language and implications of the charges just brought against Russian national Marina Butina—Conspiracy to Commit An Offense Against the United States and Acting As An Agent of a Foreign Government Without Notification. Hope you'll read and share.
1/ The Washington Post somewhat misleading says in its article on the charges that they're "not part of the special counsel investigation into Russian interference." Note that in the sense any of us would ever care about that sentence—the practical sense—that statement is untrue.
2/ Whether or not Mueller is the prosecuting authority in the charges against Butina means absolutely nothing for whether he was and is being kept apprised of the work being done to prosecute her *and* any information that may result from that prosecution. The second part is key.
The number of things wrong in *just this clip* is staggering. *Just this clip* contains *multiple* instances of treachery so great we haven't seen their like in our lifetimes. Trump *equalized* DNI Coats and Putin, and *then opted for Putin*.
2/ I'd label the above video, "When 'Good People on Both Sides' Becomes Treasonous."
3/ I agree with those saying that DNI Coats has no choice but to resign. I don't know how you go on in your job when your boss says that he trusts America's greatest enemy more than he trusts you.
2/ This stuff happens many times a day—and I let it go. But today I'm not letting it go. Because today should have unified us against the Russian agent in the White House, and instead some people are using social media to attack those who tried to sound a warning on this in 2016.
3/ We need to get our priorities straight. I'm cool with anyone finding this feed annoying who finds it annoying—that's life. I'm not cool with evidence of a Trump-Russia plot reaching the boiling point—and beyond—and snarks online acting like we're in a scene from Reality Bites.
(THREAD) Some people are clearly still confused about what happened today. Trump didn't "as good as" out himself as a Russian agent—he *literally* did, and his statement about DNI Coats literally proves it. I explain why in this short thread. I hope you'll read it and pass it on.
1/ Trump's hand-picked Republican Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, has the *same* intel on Russia's attack on America Trump has—by definition. It's undisputed. Or *would* be, if we didn't know that there is *one* difference between the two men's intelligence sources.
2/ The *one* difference between the intel Coats has and the intel Trump has is that *Trump has met privately with Russians on multiple occasions*. He did so—without the necessary meeting attendees, including advisers and witnesses—in the Oval Office, at a prior summit, and today.
Here's my tweet from two months ago saying "Maria Butina [is] about to become a major focal point" of Mueller's investigation. As I noted, the charge against her and any upcoming charges against Torshin will—like much else (e.g. Friday's DCLeaks revelations)—burn Trump Jr. first.
2/ Today's unsealed charge and the way the Friday indictment was handled suggest that Donald Trump Jr. is in as much legal jeopardy right now as Stone is. Remember that Trump Jr. repeatedly committed crimes in testifying to Congress by lying to them about matters big *and* small.
3/ NB: The tweet I'm RTing now was part of a May 2018 AMA in which I was asked if Sheriff David Clarke would be indicted. I was saying Trump Jr. would be "burned first" by the Butina and Torshin evidence Mueller has—and I wasn't sure if Clarke would at any point be touched by it.
(MUST-SEE VIDEO) The Russian national who asked this question of Trump about sanctions, Maria Butina, was just charged with a major crime. There's *every possibility* that Trump knew this woman when he called on her—as her boss says he's a friend of Trump.
2/ In 2017, I said if Trump knew Maria Butina as he knows her boss, it was likely he called on her in order to make a public statement on sanctions that he knew Putin was listening to. If so, this is part of the "collusion in plain sight" theory. Butina now faces federal charges.
3/ Trump's reply to now-charged Butina includes:
1. "I know Putin" 2. "We [NB: 'royal we,' i.e. 'I'] get along with Putin" 3. "I believe I'd get along very nicely with Putin" 4. "I don't think you'd need the [Russia] sanctions" 5. "I think that we would get along very very well"
A sad feature of the response to Trump's treachery today has been seeing those who called qualified legal, military, law enforcement and national security professionals "crazy" for sounding the alarm on Trump and Russia *long ago* rubbing their eyes and saying, "What's going on?"
2/ What's going on is Malcom Nance is an intel expert; Laurence Tribe is a legal expert; Walter Schaub is an ethics expert; I'm a Harvard-educated criminal investigator and criminal attorney. *None* of us were "crazy" or "conspiracy theorists." Shame on these sleeping Americans.
3/ I'm sorry for being angry. But it's the smugness of those who wouldn't listen to experts in late 2016 and early 2017 but are now saying, "Huh! Who'd have thunk it?" that gets to me. *Many of us* thunk it, and tried to get people to listen. Some did; some were cynical and smug.
Today Trump gave Putin ten years' worth of anti-American propaganda, attacked America on foreign soil, threw US intelligence services under the bus, let Putin lie repeatedly without correction, and refused to criticize America's chief foe—all after a secretive 130-minute meeting.
2/ He also spun wild conspiracy theories, floated a joint cybersecurity task force with the very enemies of America who are now attacking our infrastructure, and kept anyone from being in the room with him and Putin who could've confirmed he said anything to Putin he says he did.
3/ I agree with John Brennan—former CIA Director—that Trump's actions in Helsinki were *treasonous* and that the Republicans must repudiate him immediately. I believe a bipartisan commission must be launched immediately to determine if the Russians have compromised the president.
Yesterday, in an AMA ("Ask Me Anything") thread here on the feed, I was asked if Trump could be impeached for violating—repeatedly—the charge of his office (as encoded in an Oath) to protect and defend America and its laws from all enemies foreign and domestic. The answer is YES.
2/ It's time we began saying quite clearly what is now evident to all the world: Trump perjured himself when he took his Oath of Office. He did not intend to defend America from its enemies—he intended only to defend himself and his family. That perjury is an impeachable offense.
3/ Russia has been *unambiguously* identified by the federal law enforcement *Trump oversees* as an enemy of America. It launched a *military-style attack* on us. Trump has ignored that, blaming America instead. No American can say he's honored his Oath or took it in good faith.
(THREAD) In this AMA thread, I'll try to answer as many of your questions as I can, whether Trump-/Russia-related or not. Just reply to this tweet to ask a question, and click on the tweet to view my responses. I hope you'll share this tweet with any others who may be interested.
2/ I'm going to go 30 minutes more—I'm shooting for my longest AMA (100 minutes). I do these AMAs because I enjoy them and think they're important, but I'll also post this link—without further comment—in the event you are interested (there is no pressure).
Is there any word for blaming your countrymen for an attack on them by hostile foreign soldiers besides "traitorous"?
I don't see how we call Donald Trump anything but a traitor to the United States now. This is a line in the sand every American needs to be on the right side of.
2/ Now Trump—who betrayed America while abroad by taking the side of hostile foreign soldiers against innocent American civilians—has declared the European Union America's foremost enemy. There's no way any American can justify that sort of language. The GOP must call Trump home.
3/ Congress would be not just justified but honoring its sworn duty to hold hearings on the statements made by Mr. Trump overseas and the question of whether he intends to uphold his Oath of Office to protect America and honor its alliances. His comments today are *that* obscene.
My meticulously detailed legal theory of "public collusion" or "collusion in plain sight," first laid out in this feed in mid-2017, is now featured on MSNBC and advocated for by a former federal prosecutor. People are coming around to the truth, everyone.
2/ The short version: given certain events we already know occurred behind closed doors (and who they involved and when they occurred) it was possible for Trump to complete or perfect his conspiracy with the Russians via statements, offers, and requests made during public events.
3/ One such event was the Mayflower Speech. Another, publicly announcing (by interview and pic) he'd accepted Papadopoulos as a NatSec adviser after learning he was a Kremlin intermediary. Another was "Russia, if you're listening..." (7/27/16). Another, changing the GOP platform.
Even as the GOP betrays America, media is letting us down too. I teach journalism—and couldn't for the life of me tell you the reliable, coherent news content about the Mueller probe in this Washington Post article. It's vapor—you can't grasp and hold it. washingtonpost.com/world/national…
2/ Which parts of the probe are going to be "wrapped up"? When? And how? And by whom? And why now? And with what findings? And who was the source for this information? Read the Washington Post article I just linked to and answer *any* of these questions definitively—I *dare* you.
3/ What this Washington Post article *does* do is open up the possibility Mueller will suddenly walk away from his investigation without having done *anything* but (a) confirmed what we knew in August 2016 (Russia attacked us), and (b) confirmed Trump tried to obstruct justice.
The DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE says America IS LITERALLY UNDER ATTACK (that's a quote: "is literally under attack")—which phrase, I note, is in THE PRESENT TENSE—and as the head of the GOP meets with THE ATTACKER his GOP peers are on TV yelling about FBI sexts for 21 HOURS
2/ I know I've been writing in caps a lot lately. But I just don't know—I think none of us do—how to register that we're in an emergency and *every failsafe* that's supposed to protect America has not just broken down or disappeared but done so (if this is possible) *arrogantly*.
3/ Republicans aren't just running America into the ground as they fawn over our enemies, they're being *assholes* about it—gallivanting about as though they're on some holy mission to make sure orange-nosed con-men don't ever pay for their crimes because God asked them to do it.
(ABSOLUTELY INSANE) Guccifer contact Aaron Nevins tried to shut down black neighborhoods in Florida ON ELECTION DAY for a ROAD RACE that would have kept hundreds or thousands from voting. "I'm not coordinating with Roger Stone," he said... out of nowhere. sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/…
2/ That's right: in October '16, a man who claimed "I'm not voting for Trump" decided to set a ROAD RACE for the EXACT HOURS of voting ON ELECTION DAY in a heavily Democratic neighborhood in Florida and then name-checked ROGER STONE for NO APPARENT REASON. You can't make this up.
3/ Stone claimed on his website he never spoke with Nevins "in 2016," yet Nevins is either closely enough linked to Stone that reporters would ask him about his ties to Stone or else Nevins is so self-conscious he appears to be working for Stone he must deny it prematurely. What?
(THREAD) Per Vanity Fair, Stone received a link to millions of dollars' worth of stolen Clinton data from Guccifer (data he knew was stolen and which Guccifer directed him to because Stone had engaged him on the subject of stolen data). Did he send the *link* to Trump's campaign?
1/ Here's the article, which explains how Guccifer got before top Trump advisor Roger Stone's eyes, months before Election Day in 2016, information which, "if this [the 2016 election] was a war...the map to where all the troops are deployed." vanityfair.com/news/2017/05/g…
2/ Stone's attempts to defend himself on TV rather than shutting up and letting his attorneys do their jobs backfired bigly yesterday—per usual. Stone's first misstep was trying to say that the indictment didn't make reference to his emails with Guccifer when it was clear it did.
The answer to the big question everyone's asking tonight ("Why didn't the White House have an appropriate response to today's indictments?") is simple: no bloc of GOP pols or voters is demanding Trump act appropriately, so politically he has no need to.
(Morally, he's a cipher.)
2/ I first said this a year ago: in moral, ethical, and even patriotic terms, Trump will ONLY do the right thing when FORCED (and it takes INTENSE pressure) to do it. His allies know this and CHOOSE not to push. In so doing they become responsible for what he does and doesn't do.
3/ Unless/until there's a moral, ethical and/or appeal-to-patriotism force applied to Trump by those he NEEDS to stay in power, he will do and say NOTHING a moral, ethical, and patriotic human (let alone leader) would do. How do we not know this by now? It's an obvious pathology.
BREAKING: Republican Congressman Jim Jordan, a Trump Agent Now Accused By Eight Ohio State Wrestlers of Covering Up Sexual Abuse at One of the Nation's Largest Universities, Plans to File to Impeach Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein As Early As Monday thehill.com/homenews/admin…
2/ Any such impeachment effort should be read as a attempt to Obstruct Justice in the investigation of whether Trump and his aides coordinated with Russia in an attack on America. Jim Jordan—who wants to be House Speaker—is now betraying America like he did those Ohio State kids.
3/ As Jordan is a known Trump agent, we should treat this attempted coup as a *direct response* to DOJ proceeding with an indictment against the Russians who aided Trump. So Trump's response to today's indictment is a) meet Putin, b) have his agents impeach the DOJ's acting head.
American patriots—of any party—need not respond to GOP lies and distortions (e.g., the GOP's claim something "clearly" didn't happen when it's under federal investigation) but should merely document what everyone is saying so we can see later on how everyone acted at this moment.
2/ Today law enforcement laid out a detailed case that the man the GOP leader most wants to be friends with orchestrated a military-style assault on America. The GOP needed to be *very* damn clear today on where it stands on that, and it was—it chose to undermine law enforcement.
3/ In all relationships—between two people; between a nation and one of its political parties—there can come a moment when something happens that is, in the literal sense, unforgivable. It *can't* be gotten past. The GOP is at the doorstep of ending its relationship with America.
(IMPORTANT) Trump and his allies have been saying for a year that the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting didn't matter because "nothing came of it." That's now proven false: Russia said it would give Trump Jr. Clinton "dirt" on June 9—and it launched "DCLeaks" for *that day* to do so.
2/ Had Donald Trump Jr. contacted the FBI; had he rejected the Kremlin's overture; had he told Goldstone (and then Kremlin agent Emin Agalarov) that the Trump campaign would be highly displeased if the Kremlin released stolen Clinton data—it's not clear DCLeaks would've happened.
3/ DCLeaks may well have happened when and as it did *precisely because* Trump Jr. told Kremlin agents Goldstone and Agalarov "I love it" when they offered the Trump campaign—on behalf of the Kremlin—"Clinton dirt."
I think there's a *very* good chance "I love it" was a *crime*.
(THREAD) BREAKING NEWS: This thread is a *live reading* of the new Mueller indictments against 12 Russians connected to Russian intelligence (the GRU) for hacking into the DNC, DCCC, and Clinton campaign. I hope you'll follow along and share with any others who may be interested.
1/ The indictment names 12 names, some of which we may have come across before in the Russian investigation. All will now be researched by major media and independent digital journalists to see if they intersect with the Steele dossier or anyone connected to the Trump campaign.
2/ Count 1 is Conspiracy to Commit An Offense Against the US and lists the defendants and mentions *unindicted co-conspirators*, which of course leaves open the possibility that some of these were American—and connected to the Trump campaign—though the indictment does not say so.