Thomas Wood 🇺🇸 🌊 🇺🇦 Profile picture
Jul 27, 2018 14 tweets 3 min read Read on X
(THREAD) Lanny Davis to Axios: "Michael is going to tell the truth to the powers that be, and let the chips fall where they may." IOW: Michael is going to tell the truth--even truths that might be deemed damaging to *him* (i.e., MIchael Cohen). tinyurl.com/y85rje82
1/ This evening we learned that Cohen is prepared to tell Mueller that he was present with others (not yet identified) when Trump was told about the arrangements for the June 9 meeting,
2/ the purpose of which was to give the Trump campaign information that the Prosecutor General of Russia thought would be helpful to the Trump campaign and damaging to Hillary Clinton.
3/ This is obviously very damaging to Trump, but no one seems to have noticed that it is also incriminating for COHEN--because it means that Cohen is admitting that he continued to work as Trump’s “fixer”
4/ even though he knew that Trump and his campaign team were willing--even eager--to collude with Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.
5/ Cohen in his interview with Stephanopoulos on July 1: “As an American, I repudiate Russia’s or any other foreign government’s attempt to interfere or meddle in our democratic process, and I would call on all Americans to do the same.”
6/ But if Cohen repudiates Russia’s attempt to interfere in our democratic process NOW, why did he continue to work as Trump’s “fixer” when he knew that Trump and his campaign were *eager* to assist Russia with that interference? #michaelcohen
7/ This probably explains the late-breaking news that it was not Cohen who leaked the story that he was willing to testify to Mueller that Trump had advance knowledge of the June 9 meeting and its purpose (i.e., wanting to collude with Russia):
8/ apparently, the Trump team wants to impugn Cohen’s veracity about what Trump knew about the June 9 meeting.
9/ But it’s not going to work. The CNN report plainly says that there were OTHERS in the room when Cohen learned that Trump learned of the plans for the meeting--
10/ just as there were obviously others in the room with Trump when Cohen taped the convo about the AMI-David Pecker-Stormy Daniels payment.
11/ So Cohen is going to win this one, and Giuliani and Trump are going to lose big time. As Davis said, Cohen is going to win because truth is on his side. No doubt Davis is entirely right about that.
12/ But the REALLY interesting point has been missed so far: Cohen is willing to let the chips fall where they may.

How many *other* damaging (even impeachable) things about Trump is Cohen willing to disclose--even if they are damaging to *himself* as well? #michaelcohen
13/ In particular, how many of the allegations about Cohen in the Steele dossier (and there’s LOTS) is Cohen now prepared to own up to? #michaelcohen

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Thomas Wood 🇺🇸 🌊 🇺🇦

Thomas Wood 🇺🇸 🌊 🇺🇦 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @twoodiac

Oct 9, 2018
One key to getting to the bottom of this is the private-wealth office of Deutsche Bank. @NatashaBertrand

tinyurl.com/y8vhvm68
I posted this to Twitter a long time ago. It’s from Yuri Felshtinsky and Vladimir Pribylovsky, The Corporation: Russia and the KGB in the Age of President Putin. Encounter Books. 2008, pp. 40-41 (not available online):
Read 4 tweets
Oct 6, 2018
Let’s try to clear up some confusion here.

We need to be clear about terms like “investigation,” “inquiry,” and “background check.”

Let’s begin with a relatively unloaded term: “inquiry.” 1/16
Here’s the question: Should the INQUIRY re #Kavanaugh have been conducted as a standard FBI BACKGROUND CHECK or as an FBI INVESTIGATION? 2/16
An FBI background check is not the same thing as an FBI investigation (though the former might very well lead to the latter). 3/16
Read 16 tweets
Oct 5, 2018
(THREAD) Collins votes YES, so Kavanaugh’s confirmed.

This is the finale of the confirmation VOTE, but it is NOT the end of the #Kavanaugh ISSUE. 1/14
The FBI “investigation” was a sham, and that makes Collins’ special pleading for her YES vote a sham. It was a sickening performance. 2/14
The fatal weakness of her defense of her vote is that there was no meaningful investigation. Merely seeking corroboration in the form of direct, eyewitness testimony from the participants of the 1 Jul 1982 meeting does not constitute a meaningful investigation. 3/14
Read 14 tweets
Oct 4, 2018
A subjective impression, admittedly, but in the pics and videos I have seen, Senate Rs look grim and worried--even, on occasion, angry.

D claim that this was a cover-up (20+ witnesses not called) is getting traction. No adequate push back from Rs yet.
McConnell saying on the floor that the Senate must vote to confirm b/c “in this country you’re not guilty until proven innocent” has this whole matter so wrong (it’s a job interview, Mitch, not a trial) that he must be feeling a little desperate.
Read 4 tweets
Oct 2, 2018
(THREAD) The predicted early conclusion of the FBI background check on #Kavanaugh that has been reported by Politico and the WSJ is surprising and cause for anxiety and concern, but let’s look try hard to look on the (possibly) bright side. 1/8
We must keep in mind that this investigation is essentially a background check on #Kavanaugh, in light of newly surfaced allegations of belligerent drunkenness and sexual violence alleged against him by Ford and others. 2/8
So this investigation is more about Kavanaugh and his nomination than it is about Ford or any other accusers, and while the FBI does not reach conclusions, it does uncovers facts, and presents those facts to others so they can better reach their own conclusions. 3/8
Read 8 tweets
Oct 1, 2018
THREAD: THIS JUST OCCURRED TO ME. HOW DID I MISS IT? WHY HAS NO ONE ELSE NOTICED IT?

CHRIS GARRETT MUST BE INTERVIEWED ASAP
1/ Dr Blasey: The party where the assault occurred was attended by Smyth (P.J.), Judge, Kavanaugh, another boy she can’t recall…
2/ Remember: Kavanaugh’s calendar (July 1) has Chris Garrett, her boyfriend at the time (she was at least dating him) at that party.
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(