Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

13/ In fact, Trump is *still* paying off Paul Manafort today. Just a few days ago major media reported that $5 million from Trump’s post-election fund was given to “Event Strategies” to set up the January 6 White House Ellipse event. Paul Manafort is an executive at that company. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

12/ The problem Trump had at that time—because his liquid assets are profoundly limited—is that he didn’t have the money to pay for witnesses’ lawyers or for their silence himself. This is why Manafort was given millions by Trump allies as soon as he left the 2016 Trump campaign. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

11/ Indeed, the Mueller Report made clear that its outcome would have been dramatically different if investigators had had cooperation from Paul Manafort, who Trump repeatedly tampered with, both directly and indirectly, during the pendency of that federal criminal investigation. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

10/ In writing the three books of the bestselling Proof trilogy, I encountered repeated instances of Trump directly speaking with people in his circle about their federal cases as he was sharing a lawyer (and JDA) with them. It was obvious witness tampering, and it always worked. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @SethAbramson: BREAKING NEWS (CNN, on-air): House January 6 Committee “Concerned” Trump May Be Using the Hundreds of Millions He Raised… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

9/ If all of this sounds like mafia tactics to you, congratulations, you now understand how Donald Trump—who is a career criminal—operates. He has publicly said that his model for a lawyer is the late Roy Cohn, a disbarred criminal. Trump wants his attorneys to be criminals, too. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

8/ Then add two more hypotheticals: ▪️ Per the JDA the witness’s lawyer is issuing regular reports to Trump or one of his agents on attorney-client privileged information the witness has given the lawyer ▪️ The lawyer is aware that if he stops doing this, he’ll stop getting paid — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

7/ Add to that unethical conduct these hypotheticals: ▪️ Trump is paying for the witness’s lawyer ▪️ Trump is paying illegally, from funds raised for a different purpose that can’t be used for this one ▪️ Trump tells the witness they lose the lawyer if they testify against him — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

6/ You are probably now wondering, or should be, whether it is unethical for an attorney to advise someone to enter into a joint defense agreement when it is not in their own legal interest to do so (while having a conflict of interest because of attachment to Trump). Yes—it is. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

5/ Without fail, those in Trump’s sphere represented by attorneys who are part of his sphere—and who have entered into joint defense agreements with him at the urging of these attorneys—refuse to give testimony against Trump *even if it would be in their legal interest to do so*. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

4/ Trump has a very long history of ensuring that all of the people who could testify to his criminal conduct are represented by lawyers who he not only has approved but who are actually connected to him—sometimes literally, in the sense that they are his legal counsel as well. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

3/ Because Trump hires a lot of people who rely on him to be their patron not just politically but financially, and because federal litigation is expensive, there are many people Trump has brought into his sphere who cannot afford their own attorneys. He takes advantage of this. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

2/ Normally a joint defense agreement only exists between individuals who share a common legal interest, and normally there is no particular association between the lawyers representing the two JDA’d individuals—only between the individuals themselves as to their legal interests. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

1/ I think I know what the Committee is referring to—as Trump engaged in the same illegal witness-tampering scheme in the Russia investigation and the Ukraine investigation. What he does is create joint defense agreements with witnesses whose legal interests don’t align with his. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

BREAKING NEWS (CNN, on-air): House January 6 Committee “Concerned” Trump May Be Using the Hundreds of Millions He Raised to Overturn the Election to Pay for Lawyers for Those He Doesn’t Want to Testify Before Congress, “Coercing” Them Not to Do So in What May Be Witness Tampering https://t.co/RouaMWsoch — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @JoyceWhiteVance: No reason Cipollone shouldn't show up. He can always object to questions that would elicit legitimately privileged inf… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @ABC: "The Select Committee’s investigation has revealed evidence that Mr. Cipollone repeatedly raised legal and other concerns about Pr… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

BREAKING NEWS: — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @ABC: NEW: Former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone has been subpoenaed for a deposition by the Jan. 6 committee. https://t.co/cJQ… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @HeatherKing555: Just finished reading this, and wow. Definitely worth a read. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

If you were wondering why the Manger Report appeared to be in the bag for Loudermilk from the moment it was launched, I know I am just totally spitballing in the dark here but have you considered the possibility that the tweet below could potentially be relevant to that situation — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @traceylindeman: Someone just called in to request "Killing In the Name." The host said they were only playing vinyls and that he'd have… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @traceylindeman: omg the hosts have changed over. Someone called in asking for Slayer. the host: "Slayer? I hardly know her!" then… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @traceylindeman: Last person to make a request requested "Killing In the Name Of." The host replied, "stick around - i don't know when… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @RollingStone: Vancouver’s KISS-FM radio station 102.9 has not stopped playing Rage Against the Machine’s “Killing in the Name” for the… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @mikiebarb: On today’s Daily: an explosive Jan 6 hearing from a White House insider that could move Trump much closer to facing criminal… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @RepLizCheney: As we heard yesterday, WH counsel Pat Cippollone had significant concerns re. Trump’s Jan 6 activities. It’s time for Mr.… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Probation! Thank God. I was worried there would be consequences. — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

RT @AP: In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Oklahoma can prosecute non-Native Americans for crimes committed on tribal land whe… — PolitiTweet.org

Seth Abramson @SethAbramson

Candidly, 10% of those commenting on this thread need to take a breath, take a step back, and look in the mirror—as you apparently responded with such rage toward a Black rapist (R. Kelly) that you couldn’t see that this thread was about a white one. Which sort of makes my point. — PolitiTweet.org