Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMore from Seth Abramson on Trump being told he's a subject of investigation
Link to tweet
10/ In the past, the White Houseand reportersonly said Trump would be asked about Flynn's Russia contacts during the transition. "Any contacts by his associates in 2016" is a broader area of inquiry, and one I felt Mueller always should've been looking at for a Trump interview.
6:19 PM - 3 Apr 2018
New conversation
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
11/ Now we come to the BS part of the Post piecewhich is of course where it summarizes Trump's views on all this: "The president has privately expressed relief at the description of his legal status, which has increased his determination to agree to a special counsel interview."
7 replies 61 retweets 356 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
12/ Trump isn't "relieved" at anything. He knows he's guilty, continues to fear being caught, and knows a subject can turn instantaneously into a target at Mueller's will. For that reason he is not nowand never has beenplanning to sit with Mueller for a free-ranging interview.
12 replies 103 retweets 510 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
13/ If Trump believed in his own innocence, and that he'd never become a target, and that all his lying/obstructing in the past hadn't been enough for Mueller to want to charge him with anything, he'd sit down immediately for a no-holds-barred interview with Muellerbut he won't.
10 replies 90 retweets 399 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
14/ Now, the silly part: "Several legal scholars and impeachment experts believe Mueller may conclude he does not have the authority to charge a sitting president with a crime under an opinion written by the DOJ in 2000." Yes, of coursebut this fact is neither here nor there.
4 replies 53 retweets 299 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
15/ No one in America, Trump included, is primarily focused on whether Trump will go to jail, as 99.9% of the impact of the Mueller probe for Americans lies in whether Trump will be *impeached*which has nothing to do with whether a Special Counsel can indict a sitting president.
15 replies 64 retweets 355 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
16/ In other words the matter of indicting a sitting president isin facta non sequitur. Mueller can refer impeachable offenses to the DOJ, and the DOJ can refer impeachable offenses to the House Judiciary Committee, and the House Judiciary Committee can refer them to the House.
13 replies 57 retweets 314 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
17/ Mueller thinking he can't indict a sitting president may explain his statement to Trump's lawyers that Trump isn't a target. Is that because Mueller believes a sitting president *can't* be a target for indictment, or that he thinksat presentTrump, POTUS or no, shouldn't be?
15 replies 50 retweets 279 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
18/ In any case, Trump's allies will make far too much a to-do about this Washington Post article, whose ledes are interesting but (a) not identified as such by the structure of the article, and (b) way more important and newsworthy than the facts the article positions as ledes.
12 replies 41 retweets 247 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
1h1 hour ago
19/ Note: Mueller not having authority to issue a public report doesn't mean Rod Rosenstein can't (upon a finding of public interest in the case and a need for confidentiality waiver). So what the Post is implying is that Rosenstein "pre-cleared" Mueller issuing a public report.
1 reply 52 retweets 271 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
59m59 minutes ago
20/ I say that because it would be unlike Mueller to say he's going to violate DOJ regulations of his own volition; clearly, he would have checked in with Rosenstein and gotten his blessing, first, for issuing a public report (which Rosenstein *would* review before release). /end
11 replies 48 retweets 289 likes
Seth Abramson
Verified account @SethAbramson
54m54 minutes ago
PS/ Naming someone a target isn't the same as accusing them of a crime, which is why I said "as good as" in this thread's first tweet. But if Mueller had named Trump a target today, every newspaper would've reportednot unreasonablythat Mueller expected to end up charging Trump.
12 replies 45 retweets 244 likes
End of conversation
link : https://twitter.com/SethAbramson
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1371 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
More from Seth Abramson on Trump being told he's a subject of investigation (Original Post)
triron
Apr 2018
OP
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)1. Good question! Thanks for bringing to our attention.