What don't you understand about that post?
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
It seems the difference is that Waas is suggesting Trump didn’t know of Flynn’s collusion in advance, and you’re saying Trump did. I’m inclined to agree with you, but my point is that it’s obstruction either way. Right?
1 reply 2 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @jedshug
You want to believe Murray that this attempt to CYA (which exposed McGahn as much as anyone else) is more evidence of CYA than Trump offering pardons to Manafort and Flynn? Pardons he had probably already offered by the time this was written?
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Marcy, I trust your work & I think it's probably true that Trump directed the calls AND that he found out Flynn was caught red-handed. But I tend to be focused on what prosecutors can prove now. If they now have proof of obstruction, I think that's a big deal on its own. Right?
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @jedshug
No. They have proof of conspiracy. The obstruction only 1) got Mueller to the point where he got proof of conspiracy 2) gives Rudy means to FUD 3) is likely harder to prove at this point, and more legally fraught.
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
OK, got it. And I'll add a 4th: No amount of obstruction is going to get the GOP base or Senators to support removal. Only hard evidence of conspiracy will make a real difference politically. So if Waas's story is an obstruction-distraction cover for the conspiracy, I agree w/you
1 reply 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @jedshug
Yes. All the more so if people are spreading stories about obstruction that cover up the evidence of conspiracy.
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
That's a major factual turning point in itself: the Trump White House personnel are so worried about Russian conspiracy evidence (and their own crim exposure) that they are conceding rampant obstruction.
4 replies 4 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @jedshug
I'd agree if I believed Trump had any competent lawyers.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Just an observation: Trump telling Flynn to contact Russia, by itself, is just a Logan Act problem, which is weaker than an obstruction problem. So Mueller would need to have more damning content of Trump’s order or other conspiratorial conduct. Right?
2 replies 6 retweets 8 likes
Unclear. There's reason to believe Yates had more of a concern than that. And don't forget that by stalling on firing Flynn (another thing this stupid narrative covers for), you get him in the phone call w/Putin.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel @jedshug
I wish I could understand everything in this thread with the fluency that some other readers probably do, but I still know that it is brilliant.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.