#Papadopoulos says that Trump’s response at the March 31 meeting was “non-committal interest” (my wording, not his), and that he looked to see what #Sessions’ response would be. tinyurl.com/y9gup3xo
1/ This is beyond odd. There is absolutely no reason why Trump would have deferred to Sessions on this matter.
2/ Keep in mind that at this point Paul Manafort, who didn’t attend the meeting but who had brought along with him all his Russian-Ukrainian connections, was already the de facto campaign chairman.
3/ I believe Trump and Manafort were already up their eyeballs in collusion (aka conspiracy) at that point. But Trump wasn’t sure what Sessions’ response would be.
4/ Interestingly, Papadopoulos reports that there was no consensus in the meeting that pursuing the offer was a good idea. He mentions that there were even some conservative Heritage Foundation types at the meeting who didn’t approve of it.
5/ So I think Trump was simply holding back to gauge the reaction of others. This must have been especially true of Sessions, as he had been appointed by Trump to be the head of the campaign’s natsec team.
6/ To get the Trump-Russia collusion timeline straight, it is crucial to understand that at this meeting Trump was already in on plans for collusion, the details of which were undoubtedly being worked out by Manafort--whatever Trump might have thought of this particular overture.

• • •

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 on Twitter!

:(