BREAKING NEWS (from NBC NEWS): Multiple Members of Special Counsel Mueller's Team Consider the "Evidence on Collusion" to Be "Very Compelling" https://www.mediaite.com/tv/nbcs-ken-dilanian-reports-that-members-of-muellers-team-think-evidence-of-collusion-is-very-compelling/ …
1/ This is why I wrote threads on standards of proof. Beyond a reasonable doubt is roughly 90% proof—but America *won't be OK* with having a president against whom there's 75% (say) proof of collusion with a hostile foreign power, and that's *before* the other 20 probes conclude.
2/ Moreover, Barr says that Mueller only looked at "conspiracy" (and "coordination," yes, but in a footnote Barr explains that, in effect, coordination was defined as synonymous with conspiracy) so Mueller's team saying there's "very compelling" conspiracy evidence is *shocking*.
3/ "Collusion" is far broader than a conspiracy charge, as bribery can be undergirded by collusive acts, or money laundering, or obstruction, or many other crimes. Conspiracy is a *narrow type* of collusion. So "very compelling evidence" of conspiracy means something specific.
4/ "Conspiracy" is the type of collusion the *fewest* people have accused Trump of—as it's considered unlikely compared to aiding and abetting, bribery, money laundering, illegal solicitation of donations, obstruction, and so on. If there's "very compelling" evidence of *that*...
You can follow @SethAbramson.
Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.
Enjoy Threader? Sign up.
Threader is an independent project created by only two developers. The site gets 500,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Running this space is expensive and time consuming. If you find Threader useful, please consider supporting us to make it a sustainable project.