Obstruction of Justice? That’s obvious. Witness Tampering? Natch. But it was all to prevent the FBI and Comey, and later Mueller, from discovering — what, exactly? Law professor Seth Abramson has been following Trump/Russia closely from the start, and once again he lays it all out for you, showing exactly how Donald J. Trump is personally responsible for each and every element of a crime against the United States of America.
2/ To be eligible for conviction for aiding, abetting or procuring (paying for) a crime under 18 U.S.C. ç 2, certain conditions must be met.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
4/ 17 intelligence agencies concurâÂÂRussia committed computer fraud in an effort to hack our election systems on or just before Election Day.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
6/ On August 17th, 2016, Donald Trump received his first-ever official briefing from the intelligence community as a presidential candidate.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
8/ He was told these computer crimes were ongoingâÂÂwhich he’d acknowledged on July 27 by calling for more such crimes.https://t.co/eHMTR2BZ74
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
10/ Moreover, under 18 U.S.C. ç 2 case law, “deliberate ignorance”âÂÂdenying evidence of “high likelihood”âÂÂqualifies equally as “knowledge.”
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
12/ The only question is whether Trump took steps to “facilitate” the crime in a way that aided, abetted or procured it under 18 U.S.C. ç 2.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
14/ Based exclusively on public reporting, we know that Trump took several steps to aid, abet, or procure post-August 17th computer crimes.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
16/ For our purposes, the most important of the three terms we’re now focused onâ”aid”; “abet”; “procure”âÂÂis the last of these: procurement.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
18/ So the only questionâÂÂunder federal lawâÂÂis whether Trump directly or indirectly funded Russia’s computer crimes after August 17th, 2016.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
20/ Last week, Sessions finally conceded to CongressâÂÂafter providing false answers in two prior testimoniesâÂÂhe and Kislyak talked sanctions.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
22/ On September 8, Trump’s position on Russian sanctions was to oppose them and to support their unilateral abolition by the United States.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
24/ The legal problem for Trump here is that his position supports an unmitigated financial benefit for RussiaâÂÂessentially a pecuniary gift.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
26/ But Trump’s position was thatâÂÂdespite knowing Russia had committed computer fraudâÂÂthey should receive an unmitigated financial benefit.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
28/ Trump didn’t just permit Sessions to offer unilateral sanctions relief to Russia. He had other aides put it into the public sphere, too.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
30/ On March 24th, 2016, Papadopoulos revealed to his NatSec and foreign policy teammates that the Kremlin had sent him to set up meetings.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
32/ Failing that, he was to get a meeting between top Trump officials and Kremlin officials. This was known to Trump aides as of March 24th.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
34/ (Note: The Daily Caller erroneously reported Sessions permanently nixed Papadopoulos’ entreaty. WaPo has confirmed that that wasn’t so.)
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
36/ And then, on September 30, 2016, he permitted this known Kremlin agent to give a long interview with the Russian media outlet Interfax.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
37/ These representationsâÂÂplus Mike Flynn’s to Kislyak in DecemberâÂÂsignaled to Putin that he’d receive a monetary benefit for helping Trump.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
39/ This intent is proven todayâÂÂOctober 23âÂÂas Trump defies Congress by refusing to execute a passed sanctions bill. https://t.co/sLpT6mM0Rw
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
41/ The nexus between Trump’s promise of payment and Putin’s crime: the crime would help Trump get electedâÂÂand he could only pay if elected.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
43/ If at any time Trump had had anything but a historically unprecedented sanctions policyâÂÂtheir unilateral abolition by the USâÂÂhe’d be OK.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
45/ But Trump made every possible effort to let the Kremlin know that they would be rewarded for committing computer fraud to help him win.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
47/ “Collusion” isn’t a legal termâÂÂit simply means a “conspiracy to commit a crime.” In a conspiracy, there are actors and (often) abettors.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
49/ And indeed those “post hoc” crimes constitute “collusion” tooâÂÂthough not the sort that Republicans in D.C. seem inclined to acknowledge.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
PS/ Sessions lied on how the second meeting was set up: he first said a Kislyak aide asked; later, Kislyak. He was worried about his agency.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) October 24, 2017
The case looks airtight. But don’t expect Mueller to move before he has a fistful of indictments ready against the small fry too.
This is a Creative Commons article. The original version of this article appeared here.
