Everyone’s been wondering #WhoPaysAvenatti, from myself to writers at The Hill. We know that his case with Stormy Daniels is being crowdfunded with an unfulfilled goal. But how are Avenatti’s massive debts and living expenses being financed?
No one knows and Avenatti won’t say.
A few days ago, I was searching Twitter using “Avenatti filter:verified” when I stumbled upon the following tweet:
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @abdullahalsaleh view original on Twitter
Using the translation tool embedded in the iOS Twitter app, I learned that Saudi Prince, Al-Waleed bin Talal, was being accused of possibly financing Michael Avenatti.
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @ramrants view original on Twitter
I took Abdullah al-Saleh’s claim with a grain of salt, as I do most allegations made on Twitter. I looked for a connection between Avenatti and Talal but couldn’t find one. I asked al-Saleh if he was able to prove what he had alleged. His response?
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @abdullahalsaleh view original on Twitter
I was skeptical. I needed more than “reliable sources.” Then I noticed Avenatti does indeed have a connection to Saudi royalty — and a remarkable one too.
If you’ve read up on Avenatti at all, he is a fan of racing and has raced professionally in the past — with Saudi royalty.
Saudi Prince Abdulaziz bin Turki Al Saud, the one Michael Avenatti raced with in 2015, is the son of Prince Turki Alfaisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud.
Prince Turki isn’t just any member of Saudi royalty. He lead Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency for 24 years until the 9/11 attacks.
Prince Turki, as well as Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, were both accused of aligning with and financing Al Qaeda in the years before the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, according to NYT.
NYT also asserts both men “have strong diplomatic and business ties to the United States.”
While I ultimately don’t have evidence Prince Turki or Prince Al-Waleed are financing Avenatti, a connection does exist between the 3. It’s public knowledge Al-Waleed and Trump are feuding. Prince Turki and Prince Al-Waleed both have deep interests in the US. Anything’s possible.
In 2015, Michael Avenatti had no issues publicly acknowledging his association with Saudi Prince Abdulaziz bin Turki Al Saud. In 2018, he blocks anyone on Twitter that points it out (or points out who Turki Al Saud’s father is).
Why won’t Avenatti acknowledge these connections?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. Interviewing Ford’s unnecessary 2. This still doesn’t prove anything 3. Not submitting evidence when your demands aren’t met is a refusal 4. Her lawyers never gave her this option, SJC did 5. Her ex says her fear of flying is fake 6. Polygraphs are meaningless & can be rigged
If Dr. Ford (& her legal team) feels like her credibility was challenged, that’s because she was never a credible accuser to begin with. Her claim was flimsy & riddled with contradictions. She offered no hard evidence or corroborating witnesses. Her testimony was odd & contrived.
Ford’s ex submitted a statement under penalty of perjury accusing her of lying when she said she never coached another person on polygraph procedure. He mentioned Monica McLean as someone she had done this with. Then we find out she’s her BFF, former FBI, & attended her hearing?
I’m legitimately interested to see how this week plays out.
As the credibility of all 3 Kavanaugh accusers continues to plummet, Democrats would be insane to roll out a fourth accuser with a baseless claim.
That being said, what’s their next move?
Will they use the week desperately trying to substantiate the preexisting accuser claims?
Dems will likely spend the week desperately trying to pad the credibility of Kavanaugh’s accusers. If they can’t by Thursday, a new one will be rolled out to obstruct voting. If they aren’t taken seriously & Kavanaugh is still set to be confirmed on Friday, I pray for his safety.
I’m pretty sure this violates Twitter Terms of Service, for threatening violence against another, but will probably be overlooked regardless because it’s against a Republican.
Update: Millhiser’s fanatical rant about relentlessly stalking and harassing Republicans has also been added to the previously referenced Twitter Moment (above)
Keith Ellison said he turned down Karen Monahan's request for them to mutually address an investigator because he "left the relationship." While I understand why he would feel uncomfortable being around his ex, wouldn't it be worth it to clear his name? 🤔
At the start of the clip, he says "now let's talk about the current one that we're dealing with now," and is reminded by the moderator that her name is "Miss Monahan," almost like he can't keep track of how many accusers he has. There are only two that are known to the public. 🤔
This clip bothered me. As soon as Monahan was brought up, Ellison immediately adopted a tone that attempts to paint her as fanatical & compulsive. He also did the same thing to Amy L. Alexander in 2006, getting a restraining order against her & casting doubts on her mental health
Joe Biden publicly condemning misconduct, considering his documented history of it, makes me sick to my stomach.
Imagine being one of the women or children former VP Joe Biden groped, sniffed, or fondled, then watching him insincerely condemn aggressive predation in public.
I’m sure the reason his victims still remain silent is because of power and unspoken intimidation.