Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS9) Regular readers will notice that I have never advised the use of Twitter Blue to/for anyone. And the reason for this is that I wish I *did not need it* or have to pay for it. It is only *in the last 48 hours* that it began to offer a service *many* Twitter users might need. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS8) So literally from Day 1 I saw myself as paying $60 a year to make the experience of the readers of this feed better. That makes it particularly disappointing to be attacked for being a Twitter Blue subscriber—as though I’m some effete elitist who doesn’t think about others. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS7) When Twitter Blue first came out, one thing I said to my wife—in addition to everything I have written here—is that I not only hate typos, but hate the inconvenience I have put nearly a million followers through when I post and delete a tweet they have already commented on. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS6) I’m not referring to folks who’ve commented here that they personally wouldn’t want Twitter Blue—that’s fair, I’m sure true, and in only some cases based on the fact that these users have different needs. I’m referring to any upset willy-nilly with Twitter Blue subscribers. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS5) If you’re not angry that your neighbor subscribes to CNN while you do not, or has more cell phone minutes than you pay for, you have no basis to be angry that some Twitter users have been put in a situation they wish they weren’t in which Twitter Blue has become necessary. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS4) In my view all Twitter accounts are equal inasmuch as they’re used for self-expression by human beings with equal value. That doesn’t mean all Twitter accounts are *treated* equally. If you’re upset that some other Twitter users need Twitter Blue, please consider this fact. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS3) ...and more such infelicities no one asked to be subjected to, you might feel it is worth $60 a *year* to get the pre-“Edit Button” Twitter blue feature that allows you to withdraw a tweet within 30 seconds of posting it (a window in which it has not been made public yet). — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS2) ...that when you get attacked for every typo (often being told it discredits your journalism); when there is a popular Twitter account that archives every tweet you delete as though it is evidence of malfeasance; when a single wrong word from you can produce a news story... — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(PS) Twitter Blue isn’t expensive, but it’s also very much not for everyone. I could do a whole thread on why Twitter Blue has become almost necessary for high-traffic accounts connected to independent media outlets that are revenue-generating. I’d hope people would understand... — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(MORE) This is the vicious circle that tech journalism generates. Corporations know any innovation will be instantly and feverishly reported on, and that there’ll be virtually no followup regarding whether the feature went wide, worked well or was rolled out in a transparent way. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(MORE) If Twitter alerted Twitter Blue users it was withdrawing a feature it’d just given them and that they’re paying for, explaining why—and when the feature would be restored—that’d be fine. But Twitter doesn’t do that, because then the text of the alert would be reported on. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(MORE) Normally, this’d be a PR disaster. But tech journalism has a habit of reporting on new social media features in narrow/nonexistent usage as though they’re universally available—as it gives it something to write about. That practice spawns bad corporate behavior like this. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(MORE) But this is the first instance I know of in which Twitter released a new function to a class of users anyone could join, and then unceremoniously withdrew that function—despite having already told people they were paying for it—once it got the media coverage it had wanted. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(MORE) I mention this just so that people will know what is going on behind the scenes. Twitter has a history of releasing new features to an incredibly narrow audience in order to get major-media coverage of the evolution without offering the feature to hardly anyone at all. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(MORE) Yesterday it said “Edit Tweet” where it now says “Edit with Twitter Blue.” When you click on “Edit with Twitter Blue” it takes you to an information page where it describes a feature you’re paying for but no longer have. No idea why @TwitterBlue thinks it is OK to do this. https://t.co/N4eJMs6MDL — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

(UPDATE) I had a single day with the “Edit Tweet” function. Now Twitter has removed it without explanation. Still paying for Twitter Blue, mind you, just now not getting what I’m supposed to be. Thanks, @Twitter! — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

This may be one of the most spectacular *trolls* in history—and the fact that it involves a *bridge* is one hell of a (almost certainly inadvertant) nod to the traditional troll-under-a-bridge trope/mythos, though in this case the Kremlin is being trolled *over* a bridge — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @SethAbramson: Yes, but remember DOJ has long had evidence Trump (1) took stolen documents to a private residence; (2) curated those doc… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

For all these reasons and many more, it simply doesn’t do in this particular case to position the Fourth Amendment as precluding a warrant application unless and until an *eyewitness* comes forward to state with specificity that certain contraband is in Trump Tower or Bedminster. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

And whereas a typical criminal might stash drugs but not care so much if a number of confidants know where they are, in this case it’s a crime to *share the contraband by showing it to anyone*, so that makes the circle of confidants in play prohibitively small—almost nonexistent. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

In view of all this (and more I’ve not mentioned), the notion that month after month after month the FBI did nothing with respect to Trump Tower or Bedminster besides seek a member of Trump’s innermost circle of trust to say they saw contraband in these locations is preposterous. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

All this is not to mention the fact that Trump had been in possession of the contraband not for hours or days—as we usually see in cases with warrants—but over a year. Or the fact that Trump associates with enemies of America, has a private plane, and regularly travels overseas. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Even minute facts like Trump appearing unconcerned about Mar-a-Lago being searched when the FBI first appeared there to ask questions—at a time the FBI knew contraband was on-site—could be added to a warrant to underscore the possibility Trump had *moved* some of the contraband. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

And I haven’t yet gotten into the veritable mountain of evidence that this suspect is *specifically* known to destroy evidence, lie about his own conduct, use his lawyers and agents to lie to federal investigators, and face credible accusations of document-based criminal conduct. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

And when federal investigators deviate from common investigative practice in a case in which the contraband sought is more dangerous than the most dangerous contraband they commonly pursue, the only explanation for such extraordinary cowardice in the face of duty is *politics*. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

IOW, the idea that a criminal investigator requires explicit and unambiguous *eyewitness* testimony regarding the location of contraband to satisfy the requirement of specificity of place outlined in the Fourth Amendment is foreign to state and federal investigations in the U.S. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

And all this is just the tip of the iceberg. The FBI also knew months ago—as a reader here points out—that some of the folders it found in Florida were empty. And it knew even farther back than that that the suspect and his lawyers were lying about the location of the contraband. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

More than any other criminal investigation in history this side of January 6, DOJ and the FBI needed to be aggressive and creative here. Instead, they lumbered with yawningly slow speed into the very bushes where they thought their quarry was while shouting, “Fly away! Fly away!” — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Had the first warrant application failed, the failure wouldn’t be public and wouldn’t tip off Trump—in fact, it would’ve really just let the FBI know what additional evidence the court wanted to see for a successful warrant. Instead the FBI came at the investigation like Bigfoot. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Given that Trump’s primary residence and post-presidential office are in Florida, and given that the FBI did not know exactly what documents Trump had taken, and given the sensitivity of the documents missing, a warrant application could have been filed just on those facts alone. — PolitiTweet.org