A public AMA with Seth Abramson, an attorney and former criminal investigator whose substack, Proof, is conducting the most comprehensive investigation of insurrectionist kingpins in American media.
I want to know if anyone from DOJ is investigating Eric Prince, especially after his indictment in Austria for arms trafficking. We haven’t heard squat about it since the story broke back in May. Also, how the hell did Ivanka slip through Leticia James’ fingers on this? You can’t tell us she wasn’t involved in the trump crime organization way back in 2011?
I have heard nothing lately about a DOJ investigation of Erik Prince. I tend to think all the investigations of him are occurring within the USIC (the intelligence community) and therefore will be permanently kept under wraps. The USIC often detects criminal conduct that it then hides from DOJ, which I find disgusting and frankly is one of the reasons Trump is not yet in prison. As for James, the main question is why Trump was not prosecuted for this conduct rather than merely sued, as what he did is clearly criminal as well as a tort; the second question is why he was not prosecuted before he became a politician, as he began this conduct decades before 2015; the third question is why this was not treated as a larger, decades-long conspiracy that involved more people than just Trump and Don Jr. and Eric, and yes that includes Ivanka as well as other executives besides Weisselberg. I do think Ivanka was less involved with the Trump Org than her brothers because she had her own brands and projects and was less interested in real estate—she was interested in fashion and jewelry companies and brands—but given that she was investigated with her brothers in Toronto for Fraud (because she regularly helps the family sell condos and apartments, especially to foreign nationals who need to be finessed) I do not know why the U.S. investigations excluded her. Her culpability for the rampant Fraud in the Trump Org might be *less*, but I would not have thought it was zero and *do not* think that now.
I had read that Ivanka wasn't included due to a technicality. Something about the statute of limitations had run out &/or the AG filed too late to include her with regards to the specific dates they are/were investigating. I'm very frustrated by this as she, most certainly, engaged in criminal activity like TFG, Jr, & Eric. I found one of the articles, see below.
Will we ever hear about the extent of Ginni Thomas involvement in the CNP and the insurrection? Also wanting more details on Transnational Organized Crime. Thanks for the hard work and commitment Seth.
I think this will only happen if certain people flip—Eastman, Chesebro, Cleta Mitchell (if she is prosecuted, as she certainly should be). But Eastman says he will fight to the end, Mitchell is loyal to Thomas above all others, and Chesebro has the least insight into Thomas's activities. You have to keep in mind that she has deliberately surrounded herself with dangerous radicals who are true believers in the cause of insurrection and theocracy. These are exactly the sort of people you *don't* expect to flip and who you usually nab because they have left a paper trail behind, usually one related to money. The other person who could probably sink her is Charlie Kirk, but he has pleaded the Fifth Amendment and the DOJ seems to be inexplicably letting him go. But if they pinch him? He is young; he might talk if facing prison.
In 2015 I remember reading a brilliant article you wrote right about the time Trump got elected where you stated, essentially, that things were gonna get far worse before they got better. That America was about to go through hell.
First, I wanted to commend you on your prescience. I've followed you closely ever since. Second, is the article still anywhere? I have searched unsuccessfully many times, and I fear it was lost in XTwitter's implosion.
My tweets between 2015 and 2022 were all archived and are no longer publicly available, but if you are referring to a HuffPost article written in 2016 or 2017 you would find those here: https://www.huffpost.com/author/seth-abramson
Wow. That was an interesting trip down memory lane (HuffPost posts)! You got most of it right.
I started with posts late in 2016 and 2017. I think we all underestimated how fast the GOP morphed into the GQP and how many Americans went along though it flew in face of everything most of us thought we had in common: decency, patriotism, and democracy.
Why do you think the J5 bomb planter has not been identified - the FBI has been able to ID so many people from the actual insurrection, what is so difficult with the photo evidence of the bomb planter?
The perp was bundled up, it was dark, witnesses paid no attention because everyone was bundled up and masked in those days. The camera angles are not amazing (though not bad). While the insurrectionists knew what was coming on J6, folks who lived in the neighborhood did not necessarily fully appreciate it and were not on guard. But yes, I am surprised that this person—who was unlikely acting as a lone wolf—has not been given up by *someone*. This could end up being a Deep Throat situation, where we find out who did it only decades later. I do think the FBI is trying, but they seem to have no leads. That said, if they are not asking *every single defendant* they cut a deal with about the would-be bomber, that is investigative malpractice.
Oh, they surely do, but those are not 100% accurate and only minimally narrow down the pool of suspects, which until they have more than those videos is literally millions of people.
Do you agree with those who believe that Trump is already disqualified for running for president according to the Constitution, and if so, do you think we have any effective mechanism to keep him off the ballots? Might it turn into a partisan state-by-state fiasco... or would an attempt to keep him off result in total chaos and potentially another armed uprising?
I personally believe he is disqualified by law. I think that is a minority view that will not prevail in the courts—as our courts are inherently *culturally* conservative and do not like to (as they would see it) set new precedents. Judges are political creatures who fear they will lose their jobs if they stick their necks out, and disqualifying a major-party nominee from the ballot would probably lead to localized rioting. Few judges have the backbone to be seen as the cause of that, so I do not expect Trump will be disqualified from any state's ballot, as much as he obviously should be. (And if it does happen, which I doubt, I suspect it will be just one state that Trump would not have won anyway.) He did not just incite a rebellion, he *continues* to incite rebellion to this very day with his public/private words, public/private actions, public/private memorialized communications, and even his meetings, expenditures, and political "activism."
When will every trump-case judge break apart the conflicted sharing of lawyers which allows trump to surveil and control the cases of coconspirators who could turn against trump to save their own hides? The conflict of interest is unethical, obstructs justice, is it illegal? Don’t the judges see that allowing that makes them look like sleazy enablers helping trump?
This angers me perhaps more than anything else. Courts have historically been loath to interfere in attorney-client relationships, and that makes sense and is all to the good—as it is defendants (clients) who have the right to an attorney, so they should be driving the boat on decisions about representation—but this has gotten so corrupt, and there is *so much publicly available evidence of witnesses later saying their initial Trumpist attorneys tampered with their testimony*, that I cannot believe DOJ has not made it its *first* mission to break up the stranglehold Trumpist PACs have on witness representation in these cases. I wish I had a better answer for you, but this is just a massive failure by DOJ and our justice system. And it is making prosecuting ringleaders infinitely harder. (FWIW, during the Clinton email investigation there was some—albeit much, much less—corruption of this sort on the Democratic side, and I called it out then, too. This is not a political issue, it is about avoiding Witness Tampering and not having the inherent cultural conservatism and reticence of the courts serve to *promote* Witness Tampering by their inaction.)
When I read about judges allowing this conflicted sharing of lawyers, and then I see defendants supposedly choosing their own moves which are obviously back-channel-orchestrated to the benefit of *trump*, I can’t help looking at the judges and remembering the judge on the Rittenhouse case, and how it seemed that Rittenhouse judge was devotedly working on an agenda of what steps he needs to do in order to suppress public outrage when he also makes biased moves to let Rittenhouse entirely off the hook; also the same feeling with Aileen Cannon when she ordered the Special Master who was supposed to slow down or stop the intel agencies from evaluating the damage of the Mar-A-Lago security breach - Cannon tried to order the intel agencies to stop defending US national security if it was going to jostle trump at all. Outrageous.
If you read Cassidy Hutchinson’s book, you’ll see that finding an attorney, especially quickly, is difficult. Most people do not have $$$ to engage one. The pressure to stay within the “family” is relentless. And that’s what got a lot of people in this mess to begin with.
Seth, you do outstanding work. I recall you doing some livestreaming through Instagram in the past. You did say you didn't like how you presented yourself on video (I thought it was fantastic haha).
Now that twitter is in ruins, would you ever consider:
1. Doing more livestreaming?
2. Hiring someone to put your long-form content into video-essay format (youtube or shorter on tik-tok)?
I say this because when I look at your Proof posts, I go, "wow, this is so well done, but it's so long".
It is in my humble opinion that this content could reach a much wider audience in this format. It would be more digestible and match people's attention span.
I would like to do more livestreaming. I think about it a lot and that may happen. It is not so much that I do not like how I present myself on video so much as that my experience is in radio and podcasting and I am more comfortable with that. Visual optics feel like a distraction to me when my words are what I want to focus on. That said, I am not averse to doing more live IG Q&As and hopefully will at some point. If someone were to be able to put my content into an engaging video format I would not be against that as long as my own involvement was minimal; I find myself too busy to supervise such work directly. But I hear you, Caleb—my idiosyncrasies do make it harder, sometimes, for my work to get out and I regret that.
I think both formats are needed—A/V and print. I, for one, do not want to fool with the slowness of audio/video. I want to read Seth's (and others') long analyses.
It's impossible to play a serious game of chess when your opponent is flinging their doody, having a tantrum, and smearing their pureed mangos on the table. Is democracy doomed when one of the essential parties has been bought by the billionaire class, acts solely in bad faith, won't take anything seriously, and wants to see it all burn down? Can it ever be turned around or is the misinformation machine that feeds legions of dumb, fearful, and whiny right wingers with imagined grievances and fake scary "news" going to bring us down for good?
I have to think it can be turned around. But only if the GOP is made to understand that it can never win being what it is now. And for that to be proven, Americans will have to refute this entire party for election after election after election. If America does that for, say, a decade, the GOP *might* reform itself out of sheer desperation. But that is no guarantee (the decade of Democratic wins, I mean). It is quite possible that Trumpism continues to garner *just* enough winning—and frankly it has not been very much, since 2016—to cow GOP leaders into continuing to kowtow to Trump and (after he is gone) Don Jr. and other dead-enders.
A “decade of Democratic wins”? I don’t think our democracy will last that long.
The GQP has been more concerned with destroying the mechanisms and beliefs underpinning democracy than actually trying to win elections with their ideas.
The GQP hasn’t won the popular vote for president in arguably 20 years as of 2024. Many of us remember the 2000 Bush W “victory”as a questionable election as well.
Hi Seth—I haven’t forgotten the involvement of Emily Murphy in jamming up the transition process in 2020. While this might not be criminal, do you think it will ever be investigated? I am dying to know who all was involved, how was it coordinated and directed, how early in the campaign/election it was conceived, etc. Thank you!
I have learned, sadly, that if an investigation is not launched into certain conduct within a year it is not likely to ever happen. So many Trump crimes are now permanently in the ether—and not just because of the statute of limitations for them. Institutional memory and reach is just not what we thought it was. I assume Murphy is in the clear now, effectively.
Seth, aside from it’s full-scale invasion and genocide in Ukraine, how much is Russia interfering with and influencing current events -- politically, economically, culturally, etc. -- here in the U.S.?
Considerably—but often (if not always) indirectly.
Consider that the entire GOP knows that Russia will do all it can to help its politicians win elections. So when Marjorie Taylor Greene is spouting Kremlinist rhetoric, she knows that making herself a public ally of Putin and other war criminals in Russia is pleasing Trump (who wants Kremlin aid in 2024, and quite reasonably again expects it, especially via the spread of disinformation on Twitter and Facebook), pleasing the Kremlin (which now sees her as a "useful idiot" sort of "asset," meaning not an agent necessarily but simply a free resource that must be protected), and pleasing the MAGA trolls out there—like Jack Posobiec—who are powerful, influential, get out voters, and have been pro-Russia for years for their own reasons (I suspect Posobiec and his Kremlinist spouse have some dark secrets, but who knows).
There is also the simple fact that many in the evangelical community now see Russia as the most pro-Christian nation out there, a view folks like Tucker Carlson have been pushing hard. And you have men like Elon Musk who are both influential far-right disinformation spreaders and who want to (like Trump) do business in Russia in the future. So I think the Kremlin is a parasite on the back of the Republican Party whose presence there most in the GOP see as beneficial, which ensures all sorts of direct and indirect aid channels and mutual support networks. I believe Russia remains a greater danger to our democracy, for these reasons, than China or Iran or North Korea.
It is such a complicated question. Sometimes they steal it; sometimes they actually *are* talking with me on background (by phone) behind the scenes; sometimes they have indeed interviewed me—the BBC and CNN did this repeatedly—though in a number of cases, not the BBC or CNN mind you, it was to try to discredit me on things I was right about (with no corrections later being issued); sometimes a publication has a personal grudge against me (like Ben Dreyfuss at Mother Jones) so they will not use my work for personal reasons; sometimes they just do not want to re-report something already reported (there is a bias against this in media); some of them just see independent journalists as competition. We are in a really complex time with respect to the internal culture of journalism as a profession.
Question, Seth: Seems to me many of the best journalists, for myriad reasons, are choosing to go independent via Substack and similar outlets. What effect do you think Substack will have on MSM and on journalism? [Full Disclosure: I'm a Substack subscriber and commenter, but don't yet have my own Substack. [ I also subscribe to MSM outlets.]
Major media has used Seth's work without accreditation treated him like crap for a long time now. I'll never forget the way NBC Reporter Ken Dilanian treated Seth. Despicable.
Hi Seth, gosh I think you’re going to be busy with all these questions! I was wondering, if Trump skips justice where would he go, Saudi or Russia? Would they want him? I remember, in the run up to 2016, seeing two old men at a GOP rally in ‘Better Putin than Democrats’ shirts and being chilled. What has happened to the USA? You’re doing sterling work. Keep safe and thanks for your insights.
I think KSA or the UAE would be his first choices because he has business interests there and those are deeply misogynistic, patriarchal, autocratic cultures that he vibes with quite well. Russia would be a third choice, as it is far less stable and in fleeing there he would appear to be conceding that he colluded with the Russians all along. On the other hand, it would be harder for the Saudis and Emiratis to withstand demands for his extradition than it would be for Putin, who is now a rogue leader and ICC-wanted war criminal. But I still think it would be KSA or the UAE. The other question is whether there is a corrupt former Soviet republic, like Azerbaijan, where he could find refuge.
Hi Seth, why does it seem the justice department is dragging it's feet in indicating members of Congress that were involved in the planning for Jan 6th, including one Supreme Court Justice's wife. Would think giving these people something to think about rather than shutting down the government and burning it all down might help the situation?
Cowardice. More specifically, institutional cowardice. The FBI is funded by Congress. The House Republican Conference is already threatening to defund the FBI; can you imagine how their efforts to destroy the Bureau would exponentially expand if their membership were actively being targeted for investigation? The FBI is about preserving itself more than the pure pursuit of justice; we saw this with the ultra-institutionalist James Comey. I think the FBI does not know, or care to know, how to investigate those who fund it. We will see if that changes; I would not hold out much hope for now.
Yes, he will be the nominee. Yes, he will be convicted of crimes. As to whether he will serve jail time, I would say this: he will be *sentenced* to jail—or more likely prison (where sentences over a year are served, generally speaking)—but whether he will serve time will depend on whether he wins in 2024, whether the U.S. Secret Service somehow convinces a court that incarceration cannot be managed, whether house arrest (even house arrest in the White House, as absolutely insane as that sounds) is seen as viable, and other factors. But I think the most likely scenario is that he loses in 2024 and begins to serve a prison sentence, at which point there will be some degree of civil unrest.
I can't see his mental acuity very well. There are outward signs in his physical presentation. In any event, as people's bodies wear out, there are visible signs and those signs are becoming very apparent in him. I will be very surprised if he lasts another 4 years or so.
Sometime when your stomach feels strong, look up some of the old Apprentic videos, or interviews from 10-15 years ago. He's always been loathsome, but at least he used to be articulate. That's all gone now. It really is striking.
I've heard that from others. I never saw the program. I took a visceral dislike to tfg after viewing his obvious self-promotion and hearing about his philandering. and multiple bankruptcies.Nothing that has occurred since then has changed my mind.
He's very deep in denial. He seems to be shocked and surprised with every consequence. He's not a pilot and no pilot will taxi for take-off without clearance.
Trump is now suing Michael Steele for defamation for the dossier? Late and clumsy punch? And sure to lose? Further reveals trump as consummate narcissist - his entire life & “empire” are utterly collapsing in court, but he has to settle ancient personal scores, put his finger in the breached dike, fig leaf, distract media with shiny objects! Hope he runs out of shiny objects.
I think you mean Christopher Steele (Michael was formerly head of the RNC).
This is incredibly clumsy, because Trump is well aware that the dossier was raw, unprocessed intel that was self-admittedly partially incorrect (Steele said it was around 70% correct) and indeed much of it was correct. He should not want to litigate its correctness in court because he knows so much of it was dead on. I have no fear for Steele from such litigation, not least of which because how would Trump show damages? The dossier came out after the election; Trump already had a rock-bottom reputation that could not possibly get worse; and he has treated the dossier as a reputation *booster* for years now. Besides which, while the Mueller Report did not find conspiracy, it *did* find significant evidence of collusion and secret Kremlin contacts—which is what the dossier was mostly about.
Thanks for the reply - this Steele lawsuit is probably just an empty bluff and distraction and a head-fake pretense as though he can put up a fight on the “Russia Russia Russia”. Just like his use of Durham. He needs to have a sassy retort/comeback/counteroffensive to the charges against him even if it’s as thin as air. Just like “impeach Biden”. Accusation = confession + projection.
Trump sneers “I know you are but what am I?”, in public, multiple times per day.
I want to know if anyone from DOJ is investigating Eric Prince, especially after his indictment in Austria for arms trafficking. We haven’t heard squat about it since the story broke back in May. Also, how the hell did Ivanka slip through Leticia James’ fingers on this? You can’t tell us she wasn’t involved in the trump crime organization way back in 2011?
I have heard nothing lately about a DOJ investigation of Erik Prince. I tend to think all the investigations of him are occurring within the USIC (the intelligence community) and therefore will be permanently kept under wraps. The USIC often detects criminal conduct that it then hides from DOJ, which I find disgusting and frankly is one of the reasons Trump is not yet in prison. As for James, the main question is why Trump was not prosecuted for this conduct rather than merely sued, as what he did is clearly criminal as well as a tort; the second question is why he was not prosecuted before he became a politician, as he began this conduct decades before 2015; the third question is why this was not treated as a larger, decades-long conspiracy that involved more people than just Trump and Don Jr. and Eric, and yes that includes Ivanka as well as other executives besides Weisselberg. I do think Ivanka was less involved with the Trump Org than her brothers because she had her own brands and projects and was less interested in real estate—she was interested in fashion and jewelry companies and brands—but given that she was investigated with her brothers in Toronto for Fraud (because she regularly helps the family sell condos and apartments, especially to foreign nationals who need to be finessed) I do not know why the U.S. investigations excluded her. Her culpability for the rampant Fraud in the Trump Org might be *less*, but I would not have thought it was zero and *do not* think that now.
I had read that Ivanka wasn't included due to a technicality. Something about the statute of limitations had run out &/or the AG filed too late to include her with regards to the specific dates they are/were investigating. I'm very frustrated by this as she, most certainly, engaged in criminal activity like TFG, Jr, & Eric. I found one of the articles, see below.
"The court order dismissed the claims against Ivanka Trump as untimely after finding that she was not a party to an August 2021 agreement between James’ office and the Trump Organization to toll the statute of limitations." 👇https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/27/politics/ivanka-trump-civil-fraud-case-donald-trump/index.html
Will we ever hear about the extent of Ginni Thomas involvement in the CNP and the insurrection? Also wanting more details on Transnational Organized Crime. Thanks for the hard work and commitment Seth.
I think this will only happen if certain people flip—Eastman, Chesebro, Cleta Mitchell (if she is prosecuted, as she certainly should be). But Eastman says he will fight to the end, Mitchell is loyal to Thomas above all others, and Chesebro has the least insight into Thomas's activities. You have to keep in mind that she has deliberately surrounded herself with dangerous radicals who are true believers in the cause of insurrection and theocracy. These are exactly the sort of people you *don't* expect to flip and who you usually nab because they have left a paper trail behind, usually one related to money. The other person who could probably sink her is Charlie Kirk, but he has pleaded the Fifth Amendment and the DOJ seems to be inexplicably letting him go. But if they pinch him? He is young; he might talk if facing prison.
Perhaps Meadows?
In 2015 I remember reading a brilliant article you wrote right about the time Trump got elected where you stated, essentially, that things were gonna get far worse before they got better. That America was about to go through hell.
First, I wanted to commend you on your prescience. I've followed you closely ever since. Second, is the article still anywhere? I have searched unsuccessfully many times, and I fear it was lost in XTwitter's implosion.
My tweets between 2015 and 2022 were all archived and are no longer publicly available, but if you are referring to a HuffPost article written in 2016 or 2017 you would find those here: https://www.huffpost.com/author/seth-abramson
Hope this helps!
Wow. That was an interesting trip down memory lane (HuffPost posts)! You got most of it right.
I started with posts late in 2016 and 2017. I think we all underestimated how fast the GOP morphed into the GQP and how many Americans went along though it flew in face of everything most of us thought we had in common: decency, patriotism, and democracy.
Why do you think the J5 bomb planter has not been identified - the FBI has been able to ID so many people from the actual insurrection, what is so difficult with the photo evidence of the bomb planter?
The perp was bundled up, it was dark, witnesses paid no attention because everyone was bundled up and masked in those days. The camera angles are not amazing (though not bad). While the insurrectionists knew what was coming on J6, folks who lived in the neighborhood did not necessarily fully appreciate it and were not on guard. But yes, I am surprised that this person—who was unlikely acting as a lone wolf—has not been given up by *someone*. This could end up being a Deep Throat situation, where we find out who did it only decades later. I do think the FBI is trying, but they seem to have no leads. That said, if they are not asking *every single defendant* they cut a deal with about the would-be bomber, that is investigative malpractice.
Does the FBI not have access to detectors that can identify things like gait, height and gender?
Oh, they surely do, but those are not 100% accurate and only minimally narrow down the pool of suspects, which until they have more than those videos is literally millions of people.
Do you agree with those who believe that Trump is already disqualified for running for president according to the Constitution, and if so, do you think we have any effective mechanism to keep him off the ballots? Might it turn into a partisan state-by-state fiasco... or would an attempt to keep him off result in total chaos and potentially another armed uprising?
I personally believe he is disqualified by law. I think that is a minority view that will not prevail in the courts—as our courts are inherently *culturally* conservative and do not like to (as they would see it) set new precedents. Judges are political creatures who fear they will lose their jobs if they stick their necks out, and disqualifying a major-party nominee from the ballot would probably lead to localized rioting. Few judges have the backbone to be seen as the cause of that, so I do not expect Trump will be disqualified from any state's ballot, as much as he obviously should be. (And if it does happen, which I doubt, I suspect it will be just one state that Trump would not have won anyway.) He did not just incite a rebellion, he *continues* to incite rebellion to this very day with his public/private words, public/private actions, public/private memorialized communications, and even his meetings, expenditures, and political "activism."
Absolutely convincing, if frustrating, response! Thank you.
When will every trump-case judge break apart the conflicted sharing of lawyers which allows trump to surveil and control the cases of coconspirators who could turn against trump to save their own hides? The conflict of interest is unethical, obstructs justice, is it illegal? Don’t the judges see that allowing that makes them look like sleazy enablers helping trump?
This angers me perhaps more than anything else. Courts have historically been loath to interfere in attorney-client relationships, and that makes sense and is all to the good—as it is defendants (clients) who have the right to an attorney, so they should be driving the boat on decisions about representation—but this has gotten so corrupt, and there is *so much publicly available evidence of witnesses later saying their initial Trumpist attorneys tampered with their testimony*, that I cannot believe DOJ has not made it its *first* mission to break up the stranglehold Trumpist PACs have on witness representation in these cases. I wish I had a better answer for you, but this is just a massive failure by DOJ and our justice system. And it is making prosecuting ringleaders infinitely harder. (FWIW, during the Clinton email investigation there was some—albeit much, much less—corruption of this sort on the Democratic side, and I called it out then, too. This is not a political issue, it is about avoiding Witness Tampering and not having the inherent cultural conservatism and reticence of the courts serve to *promote* Witness Tampering by their inaction.)
When I read about judges allowing this conflicted sharing of lawyers, and then I see defendants supposedly choosing their own moves which are obviously back-channel-orchestrated to the benefit of *trump*, I can’t help looking at the judges and remembering the judge on the Rittenhouse case, and how it seemed that Rittenhouse judge was devotedly working on an agenda of what steps he needs to do in order to suppress public outrage when he also makes biased moves to let Rittenhouse entirely off the hook; also the same feeling with Aileen Cannon when she ordered the Special Master who was supposed to slow down or stop the intel agencies from evaluating the damage of the Mar-A-Lago security breach - Cannon tried to order the intel agencies to stop defending US national security if it was going to jostle trump at all. Outrageous.
Let’s not even get started on Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito and probably John Roberts, all the the Supreme Court Republicans of the US. (SCROTUS)
*** DIRTY JUDGES *** Please be less dirty.
Thanks for providing my new fave acronym - SCROTUS!
If you read Cassidy Hutchinson’s book, you’ll see that finding an attorney, especially quickly, is difficult. Most people do not have $$$ to engage one. The pressure to stay within the “family” is relentless. And that’s what got a lot of people in this mess to begin with.
C
Seth, you do outstanding work. I recall you doing some livestreaming through Instagram in the past. You did say you didn't like how you presented yourself on video (I thought it was fantastic haha).
Now that twitter is in ruins, would you ever consider:
1. Doing more livestreaming?
2. Hiring someone to put your long-form content into video-essay format (youtube or shorter on tik-tok)?
I say this because when I look at your Proof posts, I go, "wow, this is so well done, but it's so long".
It is in my humble opinion that this content could reach a much wider audience in this format. It would be more digestible and match people's attention span.
I would like to do more livestreaming. I think about it a lot and that may happen. It is not so much that I do not like how I present myself on video so much as that my experience is in radio and podcasting and I am more comfortable with that. Visual optics feel like a distraction to me when my words are what I want to focus on. That said, I am not averse to doing more live IG Q&As and hopefully will at some point. If someone were to be able to put my content into an engaging video format I would not be against that as long as my own involvement was minimal; I find myself too busy to supervise such work directly. But I hear you, Caleb—my idiosyncrasies do make it harder, sometimes, for my work to get out and I regret that.
I love that sub-stack provides a reader 🎧 which I use all the time. Seth, you are with me doing laundry & cooking dinner.
I think both formats are needed—A/V and print. I, for one, do not want to fool with the slowness of audio/video. I want to read Seth's (and others') long analyses.
There’s YouTube also where Seth could present his findings.
It's impossible to play a serious game of chess when your opponent is flinging their doody, having a tantrum, and smearing their pureed mangos on the table. Is democracy doomed when one of the essential parties has been bought by the billionaire class, acts solely in bad faith, won't take anything seriously, and wants to see it all burn down? Can it ever be turned around or is the misinformation machine that feeds legions of dumb, fearful, and whiny right wingers with imagined grievances and fake scary "news" going to bring us down for good?
I have to think it can be turned around. But only if the GOP is made to understand that it can never win being what it is now. And for that to be proven, Americans will have to refute this entire party for election after election after election. If America does that for, say, a decade, the GOP *might* reform itself out of sheer desperation. But that is no guarantee (the decade of Democratic wins, I mean). It is quite possible that Trumpism continues to garner *just* enough winning—and frankly it has not been very much, since 2016—to cow GOP leaders into continuing to kowtow to Trump and (after he is gone) Don Jr. and other dead-enders.
Like the Le Pen family in France? Is Ivanka the our Marine Le Pen?
A “decade of Democratic wins”? I don’t think our democracy will last that long.
The GQP has been more concerned with destroying the mechanisms and beliefs underpinning democracy than actually trying to win elections with their ideas.
The GQP hasn’t won the popular vote for president in arguably 20 years as of 2024. Many of us remember the 2000 Bush W “victory”as a questionable election as well.
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/3830161-2024-will-mark-20-years-since-republicans-last-won-the-popular-vote-can-they-rebrand-in-time-to-stop-losing-streak/amp/
Hi Seth—I haven’t forgotten the involvement of Emily Murphy in jamming up the transition process in 2020. While this might not be criminal, do you think it will ever be investigated? I am dying to know who all was involved, how was it coordinated and directed, how early in the campaign/election it was conceived, etc. Thank you!
I have learned, sadly, that if an investigation is not launched into certain conduct within a year it is not likely to ever happen. So many Trump crimes are now permanently in the ether—and not just because of the statute of limitations for them. Institutional memory and reach is just not what we thought it was. I assume Murphy is in the clear now, effectively.
Seth, aside from it’s full-scale invasion and genocide in Ukraine, how much is Russia interfering with and influencing current events -- politically, economically, culturally, etc. -- here in the U.S.?
Considerably—but often (if not always) indirectly.
Consider that the entire GOP knows that Russia will do all it can to help its politicians win elections. So when Marjorie Taylor Greene is spouting Kremlinist rhetoric, she knows that making herself a public ally of Putin and other war criminals in Russia is pleasing Trump (who wants Kremlin aid in 2024, and quite reasonably again expects it, especially via the spread of disinformation on Twitter and Facebook), pleasing the Kremlin (which now sees her as a "useful idiot" sort of "asset," meaning not an agent necessarily but simply a free resource that must be protected), and pleasing the MAGA trolls out there—like Jack Posobiec—who are powerful, influential, get out voters, and have been pro-Russia for years for their own reasons (I suspect Posobiec and his Kremlinist spouse have some dark secrets, but who knows).
There is also the simple fact that many in the evangelical community now see Russia as the most pro-Christian nation out there, a view folks like Tucker Carlson have been pushing hard. And you have men like Elon Musk who are both influential far-right disinformation spreaders and who want to (like Trump) do business in Russia in the future. So I think the Kremlin is a parasite on the back of the Republican Party whose presence there most in the GOP see as beneficial, which ensures all sorts of direct and indirect aid channels and mutual support networks. I believe Russia remains a greater danger to our democracy, for these reasons, than China or Iran or North Korea.
Why has American Major media ignored all of your outstanding work throughout the Trump era?
It is such a complicated question. Sometimes they steal it; sometimes they actually *are* talking with me on background (by phone) behind the scenes; sometimes they have indeed interviewed me—the BBC and CNN did this repeatedly—though in a number of cases, not the BBC or CNN mind you, it was to try to discredit me on things I was right about (with no corrections later being issued); sometimes a publication has a personal grudge against me (like Ben Dreyfuss at Mother Jones) so they will not use my work for personal reasons; sometimes they just do not want to re-report something already reported (there is a bias against this in media); some of them just see independent journalists as competition. We are in a really complex time with respect to the internal culture of journalism as a profession.
Question, Seth: Seems to me many of the best journalists, for myriad reasons, are choosing to go independent via Substack and similar outlets. What effect do you think Substack will have on MSM and on journalism? [Full Disclosure: I'm a Substack subscriber and commenter, but don't yet have my own Substack. [ I also subscribe to MSM outlets.]
Major media has used Seth's work without accreditation treated him like crap for a long time now. I'll never forget the way NBC Reporter Ken Dilanian treated Seth. Despicable.
Hi Seth, gosh I think you’re going to be busy with all these questions! I was wondering, if Trump skips justice where would he go, Saudi or Russia? Would they want him? I remember, in the run up to 2016, seeing two old men at a GOP rally in ‘Better Putin than Democrats’ shirts and being chilled. What has happened to the USA? You’re doing sterling work. Keep safe and thanks for your insights.
I think KSA or the UAE would be his first choices because he has business interests there and those are deeply misogynistic, patriarchal, autocratic cultures that he vibes with quite well. Russia would be a third choice, as it is far less stable and in fleeing there he would appear to be conceding that he colluded with the Russians all along. On the other hand, it would be harder for the Saudis and Emiratis to withstand demands for his extradition than it would be for Putin, who is now a rogue leader and ICC-wanted war criminal. But I still think it would be KSA or the UAE. The other question is whether there is a corrupt former Soviet republic, like Azerbaijan, where he could find refuge.
Thanks Seth, very interesting. Hopefully, he will not escape long overdue justice 🤞
Hi Seth, why does it seem the justice department is dragging it's feet in indicating members of Congress that were involved in the planning for Jan 6th, including one Supreme Court Justice's wife. Would think giving these people something to think about rather than shutting down the government and burning it all down might help the situation?
See my other responses here. This is a good question that I wrote about in responding to others.
What hasn’t anyone from Congress been indicted for their actions on and before J6?
Cowardice. More specifically, institutional cowardice. The FBI is funded by Congress. The House Republican Conference is already threatening to defund the FBI; can you imagine how their efforts to destroy the Bureau would exponentially expand if their membership were actively being targeted for investigation? The FBI is about preserving itself more than the pure pursuit of justice; we saw this with the ultra-institutionalist James Comey. I think the FBI does not know, or care to know, how to investigate those who fund it. We will see if that changes; I would not hold out much hope for now.
do you think Trump will be the Republican nominee, and do you think he will be convicted of a crime and serve time in Jail
Yes, he will be the nominee. Yes, he will be convicted of crimes. As to whether he will serve jail time, I would say this: he will be *sentenced* to jail—or more likely prison (where sentences over a year are served, generally speaking)—but whether he will serve time will depend on whether he wins in 2024, whether the U.S. Secret Service somehow convinces a court that incarceration cannot be managed, whether house arrest (even house arrest in the White House, as absolutely insane as that sounds) is seen as viable, and other factors. But I think the most likely scenario is that he loses in 2024 and begins to serve a prison sentence, at which point there will be some degree of civil unrest.
Doesn't it also depend on his health? To my eyes, it is deteriorating quickly. That is a bad thing for tRUmp himself, but not for our country.
From news reports, his mental acuity has visibly lessened.
I can't see his mental acuity very well. There are outward signs in his physical presentation. In any event, as people's bodies wear out, there are visible signs and those signs are becoming very apparent in him. I will be very surprised if he lasts another 4 years or so.
Or less, one hopes.
I'd prefer longer. He needs at least a _few_ years of confinement.
Sometime when your stomach feels strong, look up some of the old Apprentic videos, or interviews from 10-15 years ago. He's always been loathsome, but at least he used to be articulate. That's all gone now. It really is striking.
I've heard that from others. I never saw the program. I took a visceral dislike to tfg after viewing his obvious self-promotion and hearing about his philandering. and multiple bankruptcies.Nothing that has occurred since then has changed my mind.
In the 2000 presidential election when the Supreme Court gave the election to Bush, we sat back and did nothing, we let them walk all over us.
Definitely one of the times when we should NOT have been the sane, adult, do-what's-best-for-America party. And look where we are now.
I think P < 0.1
He's very deep in denial. He seems to be shocked and surprised with every consequence. He's not a pilot and no pilot will taxi for take-off without clearance.
Trump is now suing Michael Steele for defamation for the dossier? Late and clumsy punch? And sure to lose? Further reveals trump as consummate narcissist - his entire life & “empire” are utterly collapsing in court, but he has to settle ancient personal scores, put his finger in the breached dike, fig leaf, distract media with shiny objects! Hope he runs out of shiny objects.
I think you mean Christopher Steele (Michael was formerly head of the RNC).
This is incredibly clumsy, because Trump is well aware that the dossier was raw, unprocessed intel that was self-admittedly partially incorrect (Steele said it was around 70% correct) and indeed much of it was correct. He should not want to litigate its correctness in court because he knows so much of it was dead on. I have no fear for Steele from such litigation, not least of which because how would Trump show damages? The dossier came out after the election; Trump already had a rock-bottom reputation that could not possibly get worse; and he has treated the dossier as a reputation *booster* for years now. Besides which, while the Mueller Report did not find conspiracy, it *did* find significant evidence of collusion and secret Kremlin contacts—which is what the dossier was mostly about.
Thanks for the reply - this Steele lawsuit is probably just an empty bluff and distraction and a head-fake pretense as though he can put up a fight on the “Russia Russia Russia”. Just like his use of Durham. He needs to have a sassy retort/comeback/counteroffensive to the charges against him even if it’s as thin as air. Just like “impeach Biden”. Accusation = confession + projection.
Trump sneers “I know you are but what am I?”, in public, multiple times per day.
Maybe its use as defense evidence in the defamation lawsuit would resuscitate the Mueller Report and the conclusions Barr so ably stifled.