(THREAD) Independent journalists have already created a comprehensive list of impeachment trial witnesses who can confirm Team Trump helped plan the insurrection. Those witnesses can now be called. This thread lists the proof. Please RETWEET this widely.

(ARTICLE 2) https://t.co/mofvL215iA

(ARTICLE 3) https://t.co/GGQTzgo8hc

(ARTICLE 4) https://t.co/zWwGVKS8wM

(ARTICLE 5) https://t.co/rOUMucx71x

(ARTICLE 6) https://t.co/KIJyCE06dE

(ARTICLE 7) https://t.co/znKvAEQHlQ

(ARTICLE 8) https://t.co/gajR53qdey

(ARTICLE 9) https://t.co/qZz0thJYAS

(ARTICLE 10) https://t.co/7wSBua1wOs

(ARTICLE 11) https://t.co/wybTCfZ5Xb

(ARTICLE 12) https://t.co/A3FLysIaO7

(ARTICLE 13) https://t.co/6FsNHvgC1z

(MORE) https://t.co/qlmtIFtOl6

(PROOF) If you want more investigative curatorial journalism on the January 6 insurrection—including exposés on key impeachment witnesses in Arizona, Florida and Alabama—check out PROOF, below. Many of the articles are free; subscribe to see all articles. https://t.co/94g4fNJ989

More from Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

(MAJOR NOTE) The reason Manafort took over Trump's campaign in just 3 weeks despite being hired as a mere delegate counter is that ROGER STONE initiated a whisper campaign against Corey Lewandowski. That campaign started...days after Manafort returned from meeting with WikiLeaks.

2/ Stone and Manafort are longtime business partners; we'd expect Manafort to tell Stone what Assange told him, and for him to expect Stone to then pressure the campaign not only to hire him but quickly elevate him.

And who was Stone in touch with at the campaign? Trump himself.

3/ I bet you Manafort's late March emails are very interesting and that some of them are to/from his longtime business associate Roger Stone. And I bet Roger Stone's late March phone calls are very interesting and that some of them are to/from his longtime friend Donald Trump.

4/ At the end of March 2016, Trump suddenly convenes a NatSec meeting. At that meeting he directs his NatSec team to change the RNC platform in July to benefit Putin. Who later takes credit for that change?

Paul Manafort's business associate, Kremlin agent Konstantin Kilimnick.

5/ Why did Donald Trump suddenly convene a NatSec meeting 3 days after he finally hired Manafort? Why did he issue a pro-Kremlin directive at that meeting that Manafort's camp would later take credit for? What did Manafort tell Trump in the days leading up to that NatSec meeting?

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

(EXCERPT) Here are the first excerpts to be published from my forthcoming 450-page, 1,650-endnote book PROOF OF COLLUSION. More excerpts will be released each Monday until the book's November 13 release. I hope you'll RETWEET and consider preordering here: https://t.co/ZJsnHcVwGi

2/ Each of the 14 chapters in the book is divided into three sections: Summary, Facts, and Annotated History. Summary and Facts sections are present tense; Annotated Histories are past tense. Endnote numerals follow sentences, with the endnotes themselves at the back of the book.

3/ There are zero tweets from this feed in the book. The book is written in the style of a government report, chronologically ordered. The timeframe covered by the book begins in 1987 (Chapter 1) and quickly moves to a month-by-month analysis of Trump's campaign from June '15 on.

4/ The book's 1,650 endnotes comprise about 2,000 total citations. The number of media outlets cited in the book is in the hundreds, and includes reliable media institutions from around the world. The number of people discussed is so large that we'll have to put the Index online.

5/ This book is the public record of the public investigation into Trump-Russia collusion. That means it's composed of the best investigative reporting done on this topic—including any leaks directly from Congressional and DOJ/FBI sources that were later published in major media.

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

(THREAD) There is so much less to this headline than meets the eye—indeed, one could argue the story is interesting *only* in ways the headline doesn't hint at—that it's a shame Bloomberg, a great media outlet, published this in this way. Read on for more.

1/ *Everyone* knows that the next step in the Mueller probe will come after the November 6 election, as Mueller is currently foregoing any additional steps in his work because of the DOJ's recommended "60-day pre-election" rule against action on cases with political implications.

2/ *Everyone* knows that Mueller has completed or nearly completed the Obstruction portion of his investigation (indeed, might have completed it long ago), so even news that Mueller would be ready to issue findings on Obstruction sometime after November 6 would not be surprising.

3/ *Everyone* knows that Rosenstein fears for his job, and fears for Sessions' job, and fears for Mueller's job, so *no one* would be surprised to learn that Rosenstein was pressuring Mueller to release *some* sort of report shortly after November 6 in order to show his progress.

4/ *Everyone* knows that behind the scenes Trump has been pressuring the FBI/DOJ to "wrap up" their work, so—while it was not just inappropriate but possibly illegal for Trump to pressure Rosenstein during a recent plane trip—*no one* would be surprised to learn that he did that.

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

@LambeJerry Question for you: On Monday, Congress announces it's going to vote to impeach a federal judge on Wednesday. The president of the United States decides to issue a preemptive pardon of the judge on Tuesday. According to you, there's no problem, right, as there was no impeachment?

My thinking on this is identical to that of a law professor at Northwestern University who published his opinion in the NYT. But that wasn't mentioned in your piece. It's also odd that you believe the impeachment exception has nothing *really* to do with separation of powers.

You couldn't possibly think the impeachment exception has anything to do with separation of powers, as according to you and the small number of attorneys you cited, the impeachment exception isn't *actually* about keeping the president from interfering in the impeachment process.

Per you, the impeachment exception to the Pardon Clause of the United States Constitution is just a *narrow administrative cutout* to make sure that a President doesn't cause the Congress to have...what, have wasted their time? I'd love to see an argument for that interpretation.

I've read the documents surrounding the creation of both the Pardon Clause and the impeachment exception. The framers were explicitly concerned about the sort of situation we have encountered now—which is entirely unlike the situation in Garland. Your legal analysis is facile.

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

The Alabama duo—Mo Brooks and Tommy Tuberville—is one I suspect the FBI will want to investigate. At all stages of the insurrection it seems Trump was working with two Alabama Republicans to ensure the insurrection and the opposition to Biden's certification worked hand-in-glove.

(PS) Mo Brooks was the first Republican to say he'd challenge Biden's certification; was at Trump's rally talking about "kicking ass"; was allegedly conspiring with Akbar. His Alabama GOP delegation peer, Tuberville, was Trump's Senate man, contacted by Giuliani mid-insurrection.

(PS2) A lot of people will be asking about conversations that may have occurred between/amongst Trump, Giuliani, Brooks, Biggs, Gosar, Tuberville, and Akbar as to how the insurrection would be timed and how it would dovetail with Brooks'/Tuberville's actions inside the Capitol.

(PS3) We now know both Trump and Giuliani contacted Tuberville as the insurrection was happening to get him to artificially elongate his objections to Biden's win. These exhortations would've had the effect—and appear to have been intended to—give the insurrectionists more time.

(PS4) I say "appear to have been intended to" because we now have numerous major-media reports establishing that Trump was "excited," "pleased," and "enthusiastic" as the insurrection unfolded. This was the same period of time he tried to *elongate* GOP objections to Biden's win.

More from Trump

$Murray \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8$

Murray 🇺🇸...
@Rothbard1776

This won’t be a popular tweet, but I didn’t join Twitter to be popular.

Stop waiting around for Trump or ANYONE ELSE to save you.

THERE IS NO PLAN.

We are the plan. The past 4+ years have given us ample and invaluable information to guide us forward. We must use it wisely. 🇺🇸

$RW \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 \u2b50\u2b50\u2b50$

RW 🇺🇸 ⭐⭐⭐...
@Can2geterdone

THE TRUMP CARD

by an Anonymous Patriot

Bombshell My Friends💣

You probably will want to read this all.

Right now Trump is sitting on a stack of Trump cards that he's just waiting to lay down like a Royal Flush.

He has court cases still pending that will go to SCOTUS and ...

Ian Dunt
@IanDunt

Trump has left the White House.

God what a lovely sentence to type. I might do it again.

Trump has left the White House.

Lovely. I didn't know fingers on keys could feel that good.

Is there a more beautiful sentence? I suspect not.

Jennifer Taub
@jentaub

🇺🇸It's on. Day 3. The Trial of Donald Trump 2.0 continues at 12:04 p.m. on February 11, 2021

1/

Rep. Raskin invited Colorado Congresswoman @RepDianaDeGette to talk about how the mob believed they were following President Trump's orders.

2/

DeGette begins with her own experience under attack. Here's what she saw when she left the chambers. She looked at the mob and thought "Who sent them here?"

Her response. Donald Trump sent them there.

3/

"The president told the to be there, so they thought there would be no punishment."

She disputes that the intruders acted for their own reason. Wrong, they said they came there because the president instructed them to do so.

4/

The insurrectionists came at his invitation. And when there the crowd followed his words that he spoke at the rally and chanted them as they breached the building.

Trump led the crowd in a "Stop the Steal" chant. @RepDianaDeGette showed a video from the crowd

5/

$\u274cTimothy Tobin\u274c$

❌Timothy Tobin❌...
@tatobin2

DONALD TRUMP IS SO RACIST ...

— that he restored and increased HBCU funding (which Obama cut permanently) and met with HBCU leaders to find more solutions to bring higher education to black communities!

— that he gave loans to black entrepreneurs when the banks wouldn't. https://t.co/qiK2Ul7se2

— that Jesse Jackson praised Trump for helping him put together his Rainbow Coalition and for being a model for “people on Wall Street to represent diversity.”

— that he was awarded the 1986 Ellis Island Medal Of Honor alongside Rosa parks and Muhammad Ali for “patriotism, tolerance, brotherhood and DIVERSITY”. They don't give these medals to racists. https://t.co/WliqZHc34j

— that he dated a black woman.

— that he donated to and did personal favors for Rev. Al Sharpton's National Youth Movement. https://t.co/nBTvLiO128

— that he helped sponsor and finance both of Jesse Jackson's presidential bids.

— that when a homeless black woman was found illegally living in Trump Tower he allowed this woman to stay for 8 years, and provided her with three meals a day, and fresh flowers once a week.