Seth Abramson @SethAbramson @Newsweek columnist. NYT bestselling author of Proof of Collusion (Simon & Schuster) and Proof of Conspiracy (Macmillan, Professor. Lawyer. Nov. 02, 2019 1 min read

SO SAYETH THE LATE JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA: “The term ‘corruptly’ in criminal laws has a long-standing and well-accepted meaning. [It] denotes ‘[a]n act done with an intent to give some advantage inconsistent with official duty...”

Read it and weep, GOP. 

Has Trump said publicly (and repeatedly) that he likes how Scalia saw the law? Let's find out: 

By Scalia’s reading of the term “corruptly,” the position taken by Sen. Kennedy (R-LA) will require him to argue there was *no advantage* Trump could've received from investigations of his two chief political rivals that would've been inconsistent with his official duty as POTUS.

The reason that will be *exquisitely* hard is that one of the *chief duties* Trump has as president is releasing funds already appropriated by Congress. So his *obvious* personal benefit—in seeking probes of Clinton and Biden—was *literally* inconsistent with the duty he has/had.

Moreover, there's *zero* evidence Trump has *ever* sought a corruption investigation of *any* American—let alone held up aid for this reason—*other* than his two chief political rivals, making it *impossible* for him to credibly argue that he saw doing this as part of his "duty."

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.