Twitter | Search | |
Seth Abramson
BREAKING: The New York Times appears to be reporting that George Papadopoulos helped write the April 2016 "Mayflower Speech," in which Trump offered Russia a "good deal" on sanctions, and did so *after* revealing himself to Trump as a Kremlin intermediary.
Interviews and records reveal new details about contacts between George Papadopoulos and self-described Kremlin intermediaries.
The New York Times The New York Times @nytimes
Reply Retweet Like More
Seth Abramson 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
2/ I've often said that, on the facts we have, Trump was using the Mayflower speech to publicly negotiate with Putin. If in fact he allowed a Kremlin intermediary whose job was to facilitate negotiations with Putin to assist him in writing thar speech, my assessment is confirmed.
Reply Retweet Like
Seth Abramson 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
3/ The mere fact Trump let Papadopoulos help him write the Mayflower speech would have sent major signals to the Russians and the Trump campaign would have known that. Papadopoulos told them he was in contact with the Kremlin, so all knew it was watching his role in the campaign.
Reply Retweet Like
Seth Abramson 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
4/ I keep coming back to this obvious point: the only thing to do once Papadopoulos revealed himself directly to Trump as a Kremlin intermediary on March 31st, 2016 was to fire him immediately. Anything else sent a message to the Kremlin that the Trump campaign was ready to deal.
Reply Retweet Like
Seth Abramson 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
5/ Instead, Trump's campaign spent the next six months, during which it discovered (if it didn't already know) Russia was meddling in our elections, promoting Papadopoulos within the campaign by expanding his role and visibility substantially over time. It was a signal to Russia.
Reply Retweet Like
Seth Abramson 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
6/ From the moment Trump began his campaign, he used every instrument and person in his orbit to send public and private signals to Russia he was their friend and would drop sanctions. Critically, he did not change his behavior one iota once he found Russia was attacking America.
Reply Retweet Like
Seth Abramson 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
7/ Just based on the facts in this thread, one must call Trump a traitor to the United States and in violation of his Oath of Office. You cannot legally conduct negotiations intended to be wildly favorable to Russia while Russia is engaged in a cyberwar against the United States.
Reply Retweet Like
Seth Abramson 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
8/ The unilateral abolition of sanctions against Russia by the United States would be a dramatic financial and political windfall for Putin and that's exactly what Trump was offering beginning in Spring 2016. But doing so was Aiding and Abetting Computer Crimes under federal law.
Reply Retweet Like
SpringPeeper 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
That *has* to be enough, right?
Reply Retweet Like
Lynn-just Lynn 11 Nov 17
One would think so. But the lessons of the past year teach us not to count on laws being enforced or justice done for the regime.
Reply Retweet Like
TeckieGirl #DemCast #stayathome✊🏽😷❤️🐶🍪 11 Nov 17
Replying to @SethAbramson
Whoopsies
Reply Retweet Like