(THREAD) Pre-election Russia collusion may take down Trump. It's equally possible the Trumps' pre- and post-election collusion with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel will do it—a course of collusion also connected to the Kremlin. I explain here. I hope you'll read on and retweet.

1/ I must stress how unbelievably complex the "Grand Bargain" theory of the Trump-Russia case is—a different thing from saying it's not substantiated. It's substantiated in *almost every single particular*—it just *also* happens to be very confusing. Not byzantine—just confusing.
2/ The basics: Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the UAE all view Iran as their chief regional enemy. Iran is propped up by Russia. Therefore the Saudis, Israelis, and Emiratis all need a US government willing to find a way to get the Kremlin to *stop* supporting Iran in the Middle East.
3/ The best way to get Russia to stop supporting Iran—or reduce support—was/is to drop all sanctions on Russia over its 2014 annexation of Crimea, as that'd be worth *trillions* to the Kremlin over the next decade. Everyone knew that Clinton wouldn't do this—and that Trump would.
4/ Per the NYT, on August 3, 2016, Donald Trump Jr. met secretly at Trump Tower with a Saudi and Emirati emissary, George Nader, as well as an Israeli intelligence expert, Joel Zamel, with *significant* ties to both Israeli intelligence *and* Russian oligarchs allied with Putin.
5/ Per the NYT, Nader and Zamel both—effectively on behalf of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Israel, and Russia—offered the Trumps clandestine collusive assistance to win the 2016 election. Jr. reacted favorably to this offer—which got into the specifics of how the collusion would work.
6/ Zamel specifically offered a domestic disinformation campaign in the United States that would use fake social media accounts to sway "micro-targeted" U.S. voters toward Trump—basically *exactly* what ended up happening. Zamel has been connected to Bannon's Cambridge Analytica.
7/ Nader was an emissary from the Saudi Crown Prince ("MBS") and the Emirati Crown Prince ("MBZ"), while Zamel was connected to a Trump-linked Russian oligarch (Rybolovlev), Israeli intel, and Cambridge Analytica. Together they had money, microtargeting, and "dark" intel methods.
8/ Jesus... this is where it gets insane. I'm going to post five articles now that are absolutely necessary to what I'm about to say. This is... serious stuff, and it needs to be right. Please take a look at the following five articles:
9/ KEY ARTICLE 1: https://t.co/6HrOMsEpSp
10/ KEY ARTICLE 2: https://t.co/oSi7cYaRH0
11/ KEY ARTICLE 3: https://t.co/FWg1rXGH0l
12/ KEY ARTICLE 4: https://t.co/2F3iPg7lq0
13/ KEY ARTICLE 5: https://t.co/CTHAwBITLI
14/ Upshot: the Saudis and Emiratis formed a plot in 2015 to systematically assassinate Iranians and Iranian allies they considered a threat. To do this they needed the help of US mercenaries and quality intel—two things it now appears the Trumps and their allies helped provide.
15/ In other words, the Saudis, Emiratis, Israelis, and Russians didn't offer the Trumps pre-election collusive assistance for free—indeed they asked for a lot. The Russians would get trillions once the 2014 sanctions were dropped, and the other nations would get... other things.
16/ Trump adviser Erik Prince—who was *also* at the secret meeting with Nader, Zamel, and Don Jr. at Trump Tower in August '16—ran a mercenary army. Elliott Broidy, who had enormous access to Trump as a lobbyist and RNC finance co-chair, also was connected to a mercenary company.
17/ Jared Kushner—who wasn't at the August '16 meeting but *would* attend a followup in December with MBZ (who secretly entered the US for the meeting), Bannon, and the Zamel-connected Mike Flynn—struck up a very close "friendship" with MBS (the other Crown Prince) post-election.
18/ Numerous reports say Kushner got intel from his father-in-law's Presidential Daily Briefing—which only Trump could permit him to take—and gave it to MBS. The intel—a list of MBS' enemies—allowed MBS to target his domestic enemies and kill some of them. https://t.co/8zzG6KPAR5
19/ MBS subsequently told friends that Kushner was "in his pocket." And why would he think otherwise? Trump had (apparently) declassified intel for MBS' use as part of his program of domestic and international assassination. It was that very program that targeted Jamal Khashoggi.
20/ So *no one* was surprised when—despite the CIA concluding that MBS ordered Khashoggi killed—Trump gave his "I'm colluding with this guy" response, saying (as he had of Putin) that he believed MBS wasn't involved in the killing because... wait for it... MBS told him he wasn't.
21/ This five-party collusion explains why Trump went to Saudi Arabia first on his first trip abroad and immediately sold them weapons; why Kushner uses WhatsApp for all his MBS communications (it frustrates oversight); why Prince was Trump's envoy to Russia in the Seychelles...
22/ ...why Broidy was given $1 billion in business by Nader; why Nader met with White House officials repeatedly in the first 60 days of Trump's administration; why Mueller originally suspected Papadopoulos as an Israeli spy; why Flynn, Barrack, Gates, and other Trump allies...
23/ ...began lobbying Trump as soon as he was elected to send nuclear tech to Saudi Arabia (partly to build new nuclear reactors, but with a longer-term goal of letting Saudi Arabia and the UAE develop nuclear weapons as a deterrence of Iran); why Trump ripped up the Iran deal...
24/ ...even though Iran was in compliance; and more. Look: we know Trump's top aides were willing to assist foreign nations in assassinating people living in the U.S., because that's *exactly* what Mike Flynn was caught trying to do—extradite a Turkish cleric to be killed abroad.
25/ The reason this is all so confusing is that *some* of the motives in play may have been reasonable. Iran *is* a state sponsor of terrorism—so it's not so far out of bounds to think that a U.S. government might want to assist Iran's many enemies in the Middle East if possible.
26/ But many of the motives involved were *illegal*, too. Namely—as was the case with Russia—the Trumps (plus Kushner) are *easily* bribed, and willing to set U.S. policy on the basis of bribes. With Putin, it was billions in real estate deals in Moscow that easily bribed Trump.
27/ With Saudi Arabia, Trump and Jared being the *only* people in the White House who supported the Saudi blockade of Qatar suggests that—when Qatar shortly thereafter turned around and "loaned" Jared $1 billion—they were being strong-armed by secret Trump-Saudi Arabia collusion.
28/ Just so, the Trumps are trying to expand (and *have* expanded) their real estate empire into the UAE, which makes pleasing the Emiratis important as a business proposition. And since Trump doesn't care how many people the Saudis or Emiratis assassinate, why not help them out?
29/ This sort of Bribery—a federal crime—is of course impeachable under the Constitution. But if a story that just came out in the Middle East Eye—which has been *very* accurate on the Khashoggi case—is correct, the Trumps may have just crossed the line into something far darker.
30/ If this BREAKING NEWS is accurate, the Trumps *actively* participated in the Saudi-Emirati-Israeli assassination scheme—which, remember, per the links in this thread, both Nader and Zamel were part of—in order to get financial benefits on the back end. https://t.co/GqRNutuq6H
31/ Simply put, under circumstances in which you know MBS is criminally responsible for the murder of a Washington Post journalist, you *can't* assist him in escaping detection by delivering to him a plan to do just that. That'd be Accessory After the Fact to First-Degree Murder.
32/ *Obviously* I want to see the Middle East Eye story reported elsewhere also, but again, the Middle East Eye has repeatedly broken news in the Khashoggi case. Plus, their scoop fits with *all the other evidence* we have of this plot dating back (at least) to early August 2016.
33/ I can't help but recall, now, how Pompeo was the CIA director, and then Tillerson was pushed out at State so Pompeo could replace him, and then Trump started singing his praises in terms of his *loyalty*. Well, it'd take that sort of "loyal" person to do something like this.
34/ There are too many angles here to count: for instance, one wouldn't normally think Bannon would be at all the planning meetings for Trump-Russia-Saudi-Emirati-Israeli collusion—but it makes sense when you understand that Zamel and Cambridge Analytica were crucial to the plan.
35/ Flynn's involvement might also be a mystery, until you learn that Zamel had previously tried to recruit him for *his* intel outfit (Flynn had one too), and Flynn thereafter became an *energy lobbyist* trying to bring nuclear energy (thus, eventually, weapons) to Saudi Arabia.
36/ A list of the people relevant to this plot:

Trump Sr.
Trump Jr.
Kushner
Bannon
Flynn
Nader
Broidy
Prince
Zamel
MBS
MBZ
Rybolovlev*
Barrack
Gates
McFarlane
Dmitriev
+ others

*There's credible evidence Rybolovlev had two secret meetings with Trump in the 10 days pre-election.
37/ My point in writing this thread *isn't* thinking I can explain every aspect of this to all of you on Twitter—the 5- (really 6-) nation "Grand Bargain" requires, literally, an entire book to explain properly. And—as importantly—to document with reliable, major-media reporting.
38/ The important thing to understand is that all the major-media reporting you've read saying that Mueller is looking at *multi-state collusion*—not just a "bipolar" collusion between the Trumps and Russia—is not just correct but *richly* supported by reams of *public* evidence.
39/ This also means that when you see continued reporting on the Khashoggi case, you shouldn't see it as merely the tail-end of a story from weeks ago that is losing steam... but quite possibly the *beginning* of a story that will ultimately lead to the end of Trump's presidency.
40/ I've been saying forever that "Trump-Russia"—which is now the catch-all term for all pre- and post-election collusive activities orchestrated by the Trumps and their allies—is about *greed*. These are really *really* bad people, folks—and we'll soon learn just *how* bad. /end
UPDATE/ This thread continues, with additional *significant* evidence of the "Grand Bargain," here: https://t.co/baJIs3TDfC

More from Seth Abramson

(THREAD) To understand the second impeachment of Donald Trump, we must understand the words that preceded and augmented his January 6 incitement of insurrection. This thread unpacks four key speeches—Don Jr., Giuliani, Mo Brooks, and Eric Trump. I hope you'll read on and RETWEET.


1/ If you haven't yet seen my analysis of Trump's January 6 "incitement to insurrection" speech, you can find it at the link below. This thread will look at four shorter—but deeply consequential—speeches just before Trump's, all by Trump allies or family.


2/ DONALD TRUMP JR.

Trump Jr.'s speech on January 6—which ended less than an hour before his father incited an insurrection—is one of the most inscrutable of the day, because its beginning includes some promisingly responsible rhetoric. Then it descends into madness and chaos.

3/ "I'm looking at the crowd here, and you did it all [congregate here] without burning down buildings! You did it without ripping down churches! Without looting! I didn't know that that was possible!" Within 2 hours of his speech, Don Jr.'s audience would be looting the Capitol.

4/ So obviously Don Jr.'s opening is ironic to a historic degree, but this isn't the first time we've heard this rhetoric from him. He habitually ignores right-wing violence because he knows that his chief rhetorical canard—which marries progressivism and violences—gets applause.
As I know from my many years as a criminal defense attorney, GP, inmates can usually get books if they're sent directly from the publisher. What is your inmate number going to be? I will try to get you a copy of PROOF OF COLLUSION to help you pass the time while you're in prison.


2/ As GP rails against Mueller to help sell movie rights to his story (or whatever), here's what his attorneys actually said in court: "Our firm would in a second stand up if we saw prosecutorial or governmental misconduct. We have seen no such thing." But they didn't stop there.

3/ George's attorneys added, "We have seen no entrapment. We have seen no set-up by U.S. intelligence people. Everything we saw, they’ve been on the square." So apparently on the same day my world "collapses," George's lawyers will *also* experience a massive temporal distortion.
About a month ago, I said to Jeffrey Toobin that it was Mike Flynn—not Paul Manafort—who had the *most* to offer Robert Mueller on the collusion question, underscoring that Flynn's December 2017 plea deal gave Mueller far more than we ever realized. Now here we are, 10 months on.


2/ Trump had two opportunities to formally name Flynn and his co-conspirator Erik Prince to his NatSec team during the 2016 campaign—he declined to do so *both times*. In the criminal justice system this is evidence of consciousness of guilt. Trump knew what these men were doing.

3/ That Trump sought out Flynn—not the other way around—in August '15, and began using him as his chief NatSec adviser right away, but never put him on his National Security Advisory Committee is critical evidence that Flynn was working on projects that had to be "off the books."

More from Politics

This idea - that elections should translate into policy - is not wrong at all. But political science can help explain why it's not working this way. There are three main explanations: 1. mandates are constructed, not automatic, 2. party asymmetry, 3. partisan conpetition 1/


First, party/policy mandates from elections are far from self-executing in our system. Work on mandates from Dahl to Ellis and Kirk on the history of the mandate to mine on its role in post-Nixon politics, to Peterson Grossback and Stimson all emphasize that this link is... 2/

Created deliberately and isn't always persuasive. Others have to convinced that the election meant a particular thing for it to work in a legislative context. I theorized in the immediate period of after the 2020 election that this was part of why Repubs signed on to ...3/

Trump's demonstrably false fraud nonsense - it derailed an emerging mandate news cycle. Winners of elections get what they get - institutional control - but can't expect much beyond that unless the perception of an election mandate takes hold. And it didn't. 4/

Let's turn to the legislation element of this. There's just an asymmetry in terms of passing a relief bill. Republicans are presumably less motivated to get some kind of deal passed. Democrats are more likely to want to do *something.* 5/

You May Also Like

So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
Trading view scanner process -

1 - open trading view in your browser and select stock scanner in left corner down side .

2 - touch the percentage% gain change ( and u can see higest gainer of today)


3. Then, start with 6% gainer to 20% gainer and look charts of everyone in daily Timeframe . (For fno selection u can choose 1% to 4% )

4. Then manually select the stocks which are going to give all time high BO or 52 high BO or already given.

5. U can also select those stocks which are going to give range breakout or already given range BO

6 . If in 15 min chart📊 any stock sustaing near BO zone or after BO then select it on your watchlist

7 . Now next day if any stock show momentum u can take trade in it with RM

This looks very easy & simple but,

U will amazed to see it's result if you follow proper risk management.

I did 4x my capital by trading in only momentum stocks.

I will keep sharing such learning thread 🧵 for you 🙏💞🙏

Keep learning / keep sharing 🙏
@AdityaTodmal