In this public Q&A, I answer full subscribers' questions about the news of a secret White House meeting on the evening of January 5—and, as importantly, the news about who was on the guest-list.
First I Just wanted to say thank you for everything you're doing to expose what the media is not. My question is- how do you keep your brain from not exploding connecting all the dots, organizing the information and then writing such long and detailed articles? I'm sincerely impressed with how your brain 🧠 works 😊
I have had to clear out nearly all the stress in the rest of my life. Before I did that, it was... hard. Writing the Proof Trilogy was a truly grueling and gutting process. It was physically, psychologically, emotionally, and even spiritually harmful. I'm glad I'm working in a slightly different format and on a different timeframe now.
Oh, the FBI could have him if they wanted him. I don't see anyone doubting that. He has needed money so badly while on the run that there's no real doubt that he's left a money trail. He recently popped up live, even. The question I have is why he hasn't even been interrogated. The only thing I can say is that the Bureau is committed to a 1950s ethos in which they slowly and laboriously work their way up a tall criminal hierarchy—even if it threatens their eventual case(s) against the kingpins—rather than working on concurrent tracks. It's a dangerously unimaginative criminal investigative practice.
I get frustrated when pundits say (paraphrasing) that since there are no FBI or DOJ press conferences or "leaks" on the investigation of the kingpins' participation in the insurrection, they're likely not investigating them. In a case this big, what information should they provide the public and how often? Couldn't they tip off the guilty parties?
I don't think people want pressers—though an opportunity for media to meaningfully ask questions of *some* kind would be appreciated, as Congressional oversight has at times seemed lackluster and settled for answers I think some journalists wouldn't—but the sort of public (and/or quickly-revealed) actions that *do* come with investigations: subpoenas, document demands, interviews, interrogations, raids, and so on. The only downside to being a rich, powerful, or famous person in the cross-hairs of the FBI (I mean as compared to a regular person) is that when a major event happens in the investigation is does leak. Indeed, often the target is the person who leaks it, as it benefits them to politicize their case (think how Roger Stone writes about it whenever he has any FBI contact). We've seen none of that, which really does make it seem that nothing is happening. We would have heard something from someone of some kind at some time if such famous people were being aggressively looked into by federal LEOs.
After January 6th, do you think the White House will be more prepared this time for the next attempt/rally in September? Like, will they have the national guard ready ahead of time & not leave the capitol police out to dry?
Why is there no equivalent to the Hillary's email fiasco from the FBI on this investigation? If dumb guys like Stone were 'careful'-how many intel (former intel) guys were much more careful? What are your feelings on Comey (FBI) handing the Executive to Trump?
There is a culturally conservative bent to law enforcement that goes beyond politics. The hatred within the Bureau for Clinton was unprecedented and went beyond even misogyny to conspiracy theory, class hatred, old Bill Clinton scandals, and more. Leadership at the FBI, as revealed by the Comey/McCabe emails, knew that many of the rank-and-file were Trumpists and that some of those agents were willing to go rogue to aid Trump. I think there was a culture that enabled some of the misconduct during the Clinton case, and since no one was ever published for it, it will continue. Meanwhile, agents saw good people who worked the Trump case get hounded by Congress and then inexplicably thrown under the bus by FBI leadership—presumably to keep the rank-and-file happy for the other 90%+ of their jobs, which don't directly involve domestic politics. The FBI needs a complete overhaul and it won't get it even though (ironically) the two major parties likely agree on this. That the Giuliani leak case took five years and ended with a shrug in the face of obviously illicit behavior should have been a huge scandal—and a sign of how broken the Bureau is.
Media has tried and failed to get key logs. Many of the logs are inaccurate and in some cases visitors appear to have come in who were not logged. Also, it's not clear whether Congress could get the logs now as even the Biden administration might fight certain disclosures in court because now they don't (always) want people to know who *they* are meeting with. What can I say? Government is broken. There are key meetings that happened whose attendees we only know because of self-disclosures. The good news is that screws may now be applied sufficiently to get some more disclosures. Also, some of the meetings were in other locations where people are/were easier to identify/track (see prior PROOF reporting on the Willard Hotel and Trump International the week of the insurrection).
Hmm. Ok. Yeah I’ve read all your previous PROOF posts relating to the insurrection and am amazed at how you can keep organized all the names and dates and places and who said what and pull it together all together so it makes sense and connects all those elusive dots!
There is a difference though between current logs and logs of a past administration. If the current admin wanted to keep certain logs private by claiming it was in the interests of national security, they could make that argument regardless of whether they voluntarily released logs of a prior administration whose visitors would not affect current national security in most situations. The perceived need to carve out an exception shouldn't be used to swallow the rule.
Do you think they will treat this like a RICO type situation where they can arrest some with lesser directly proof of corruption yet are still corrupt assholes? Keep up the amazing work, America will greatly appreciate your efforts when today becomes history tomorrow.
I don't claim to be a RICO expert, but I'll say that back in 2017 and 2018 some of us lawyers who wondered aloud whether the Trump Org could have run afoul of RICO got laughed at by other lawyers who blithely presumed that eventuality was preposterous. They're not laughing now—as it seems entirely possible that document disclosures relating to the NYAG/Manhattan DA case could eventually lead to at least a RICO probe of Trump's business(es).
What do you think of the prospects of using RICO to get to the heart of the matter- Trump and the Republican party leadership using the US government as a corrupt for-profit enterprise to enrich themselves? Why do you think there have never been charges related to misuse of government property such as when Trump held a campaign event on the White House lawn or used the White House website and other government property and personnel as adjuncts of his campaign?
This is the top question I receive. One thing is clear: the entire criminal justice system has collapsed in its ability to hold Trump accountable for his actions. I'm not so much speaking of prosecutors in the Biden era—as the chance to bring justice to Trump really only began when he was out of office, as Barr blocked any significant law enforcement action prior to that, and of course while in office Trump couldn't be prosecuted (though that's probably arguable, as he could likely be *indicted* if not prosecuted) and had the pardon power. But the FBI, CIA, DIA, NSA, Pentagon, and others fell down during the Trump administration—that's clear. Some of the IGs trying to do due diligence were fired, true, but others simply took their time, allowed Barr to scuttle investigations, or lacked courage in their reports or got cold feet ex ante. A level of secrecy was permitted to surround Trumpworld and its illicit actions that never surrounded any case involving high-profile Democratic politicians. Criminal referrals from Congress got ignored by DOJ, true, but then the FBI also conducted a sham investigation of Kavanaugh, leaked to the 2016 Trump campaign, and lied to the NYT in late October 2016. And on and on. The attempt to prosecute now Trump is hurt by all his pardons of key witnesses, and by the fact that so many are convinced that if they can delay any future criminal cases long enough, Trump will return to office and pardon them. Trump has long been tampering—publicly and privately, per Congressional reports—with the relevant witnesses. They've had years to synchronize stories, destroy evidence, develop false narratives, and so on. And any prosecutor in Georgia or New York or D.C. or at DOJ who takes on Trump knows their life will be in danger and that their political career and personal life will be affected by their decision permanently. That's a lot to take on, though yes, it's their job.
I do believe that there will be at least one attempt to indict Trump somewhere; I believe the case will drag on for years; and that it seems likely Trump will either return to the White House or die of natural causes before the case ends, or that in the miraculous event that it ends in a reasonable timeframe and he is convicted, the charge brought and his lack of a prior record (incredibly) and his status as an ex-president could save him from jail-time. I certainly do believe he would flee the country to evade prison. So the answer is, no, there will never be *full* justice for all he has done. There is a Hail Mary chance there may be *some* justice, but it will take a long, long time and probably extend beyond a possible or even likely Trump run in 2024. What would increase the odds if it a large enough case is built against a member of Trump's inner circle first that they flip dramatically: I am hoping this will be Giuliani or Barrack. But Kushner or Don Jr. would in theory be a candidate. I just think the Democratic Party is averse to seeming "political" by just dispensing owed justice that Garland is going to have to be a *very* independent thinker to do the right thing(s).
TY as well for all the specifics. If not Trump, what about any accountability for J6 leaders/organizers? This all doesn't seem to bode well for democracy holding for very long..
Do you think it's just too politically dangerous for Trump to face actual legal responsibility, and the best case outcome might end up being Trump gets off scot free, but a multitude of safeguards are put into place legally to prevent what Trump did from ever happening again with someone else? It seems like the people in power are rightly afraid of a wave of craziness & potential violence that could kick off if Trump is ever truly held accountable, locked up, etc.
I believe you have it pegged: the Democratic Party believes it is "safer" for Trump to just go away, even if it means letting him run in 2024. They believe he'd lose and that, having lost, he would disappear. I think it's a dangerous game of chicken that in the bargain wounds our rule of law and Americans' belief in our justice system and our democracy. I also think only a fool would see Trump in this way—it's such a profound misunderstanding of the clear and present danger threat he represents.
As an attorney, I believe you uphold the law at all costs. Anything less is a betrayal of the oath our officials took and all lawyers take. That I took. But yes, I think many in DC think this way.
If that’s what the dems are thinking…..(?) Way to dangerous to think “he’d lose and go away!” That’s just too dang logical AND hopeful! He’s way too evil and sinister !
That's a horribly depressing thought and would mean we have a dysfunctional justice system, one that is so bad it would need to be scrapped and replaced before we could ever trust "the system" again. It is essentially conceding that a relatively small group of armed bullies can override the system at will.
Percent chance that 1 trump actually faces a trial and 2 that all any/all of the j6 leaders/planners face the same? It’s so demoralizing to see blatant crime go unpunished let alone unacknowledged by doj. Lastly will seditionists ever be booted from Congress?
Again not looking for anything definitive just your odds on this.
I think the odds are moderate to high that mid-level insurrectionist leaders—at least a couple of them—ultimately face *some* justice. Those at the very top? The odds are very long. Our system treats the rich, powerful, and famous with kid gloves you would never see in any case—*any* case—involving a "regular human."
Will PROOF have, sometime in the future, in one article, a chronological summary timeline of the whereabouts (meetings) of all the insurrectionist planners? TY Seth.
It's *possible*, but the question is how long it will be before we have enough specific (tick-tock) info to do that yet. For now we have these early attempts at a broader view:
I don't think she was in his inner circle, no. But would she like to be now? I wonder. When she sent privately funded troops from SD to the southern border, it underscored how dangerously lawless she is—if the death toll in SD due to her deliberate negligence weren't enough indication. Like Nikki Haley or any other Trumpist who wants to be "the woman on Trump's next campaign ticket"—their thinking/construction, it seems, not mine—she does not believe in anything except her own acquisition of power. Elise Stefanik is in this camp as well.
I have a report coming soon on where Lindell was at that moment on January 5. It appears to have been in Virginia. But who he was with... that's a story. Stay tuned. Working on it now.
Hey everyone—the article just received a critical coda you need to check out. Link: https://sethabramson.substack.com/p/breaking-news-new-revelations-on
Keep digging! There's a place for you in the annals of the history written about saving our republic
Thanks for the support, Mike!
First I Just wanted to say thank you for everything you're doing to expose what the media is not. My question is- how do you keep your brain from not exploding connecting all the dots, organizing the information and then writing such long and detailed articles? I'm sincerely impressed with how your brain 🧠 works 😊
I have had to clear out nearly all the stress in the rest of my life. Before I did that, it was... hard. Writing the Proof Trilogy was a truly grueling and gutting process. It was physically, psychologically, emotionally, and even spiritually harmful. I'm glad I'm working in a slightly different format and on a different timeframe now.
Why do you think Ali Alexander has been so difficult to apprehend?
Oh, the FBI could have him if they wanted him. I don't see anyone doubting that. He has needed money so badly while on the run that there's no real doubt that he's left a money trail. He recently popped up live, even. The question I have is why he hasn't even been interrogated. The only thing I can say is that the Bureau is committed to a 1950s ethos in which they slowly and laboriously work their way up a tall criminal hierarchy—even if it threatens their eventual case(s) against the kingpins—rather than working on concurrent tracks. It's a dangerously unimaginative criminal investigative practice.
I get frustrated when pundits say (paraphrasing) that since there are no FBI or DOJ press conferences or "leaks" on the investigation of the kingpins' participation in the insurrection, they're likely not investigating them. In a case this big, what information should they provide the public and how often? Couldn't they tip off the guilty parties?
I don't think people want pressers—though an opportunity for media to meaningfully ask questions of *some* kind would be appreciated, as Congressional oversight has at times seemed lackluster and settled for answers I think some journalists wouldn't—but the sort of public (and/or quickly-revealed) actions that *do* come with investigations: subpoenas, document demands, interviews, interrogations, raids, and so on. The only downside to being a rich, powerful, or famous person in the cross-hairs of the FBI (I mean as compared to a regular person) is that when a major event happens in the investigation is does leak. Indeed, often the target is the person who leaks it, as it benefits them to politicize their case (think how Roger Stone writes about it whenever he has any FBI contact). We've seen none of that, which really does make it seem that nothing is happening. We would have heard something from someone of some kind at some time if such famous people were being aggressively looked into by federal LEOs.
Thanks, Seth.
After January 6th, do you think the White House will be more prepared this time for the next attempt/rally in September? Like, will they have the national guard ready ahead of time & not leave the capitol police out to dry?
Yes, I think they will.
Why is there no equivalent to the Hillary's email fiasco from the FBI on this investigation? If dumb guys like Stone were 'careful'-how many intel (former intel) guys were much more careful? What are your feelings on Comey (FBI) handing the Executive to Trump?
There is a culturally conservative bent to law enforcement that goes beyond politics. The hatred within the Bureau for Clinton was unprecedented and went beyond even misogyny to conspiracy theory, class hatred, old Bill Clinton scandals, and more. Leadership at the FBI, as revealed by the Comey/McCabe emails, knew that many of the rank-and-file were Trumpists and that some of those agents were willing to go rogue to aid Trump. I think there was a culture that enabled some of the misconduct during the Clinton case, and since no one was ever published for it, it will continue. Meanwhile, agents saw good people who worked the Trump case get hounded by Congress and then inexplicably thrown under the bus by FBI leadership—presumably to keep the rank-and-file happy for the other 90%+ of their jobs, which don't directly involve domestic politics. The FBI needs a complete overhaul and it won't get it even though (ironically) the two major parties likely agree on this. That the Giuliani leak case took five years and ended with a shrug in the face of obviously illicit behavior should have been a huge scandal—and a sign of how broken the Bureau is.
Omg, I regret that I've been so naive about the FBI. This is such a sad thing to hear.
Can’t we get visitor logs from the White House to see who was there that week and in the days leading up to and after the insurrection?
Or surely those who were on security details that night could be questioned as to who visited.
Media has tried and failed to get key logs. Many of the logs are inaccurate and in some cases visitors appear to have come in who were not logged. Also, it's not clear whether Congress could get the logs now as even the Biden administration might fight certain disclosures in court because now they don't (always) want people to know who *they* are meeting with. What can I say? Government is broken. There are key meetings that happened whose attendees we only know because of self-disclosures. The good news is that screws may now be applied sufficiently to get some more disclosures. Also, some of the meetings were in other locations where people are/were easier to identify/track (see prior PROOF reporting on the Willard Hotel and Trump International the week of the insurrection).
Hmm. Ok. Yeah I’ve read all your previous PROOF posts relating to the insurrection and am amazed at how you can keep organized all the names and dates and places and who said what and pull it together all together so it makes sense and connects all those elusive dots!
There is a difference though between current logs and logs of a past administration. If the current admin wanted to keep certain logs private by claiming it was in the interests of national security, they could make that argument regardless of whether they voluntarily released logs of a prior administration whose visitors would not affect current national security in most situations. The perceived need to carve out an exception shouldn't be used to swallow the rule.
I would not expect the Trump call or visitor logs to be anywhere close to accurate.
Do you think they will treat this like a RICO type situation where they can arrest some with lesser directly proof of corruption yet are still corrupt assholes? Keep up the amazing work, America will greatly appreciate your efforts when today becomes history tomorrow.
I don't claim to be a RICO expert, but I'll say that back in 2017 and 2018 some of us lawyers who wondered aloud whether the Trump Org could have run afoul of RICO got laughed at by other lawyers who blithely presumed that eventuality was preposterous. They're not laughing now—as it seems entirely possible that document disclosures relating to the NYAG/Manhattan DA case could eventually lead to at least a RICO probe of Trump's business(es).
What do you think of the prospects of using RICO to get to the heart of the matter- Trump and the Republican party leadership using the US government as a corrupt for-profit enterprise to enrich themselves? Why do you think there have never been charges related to misuse of government property such as when Trump held a campaign event on the White House lawn or used the White House website and other government property and personnel as adjuncts of his campaign?
Excuse the crap grammar. I am who I am....
Have you ever gotten any indication that anyone in law enforcement is s aware of your work?
Yes.
I will sit to forwarding some of your work to leaders and my members of Congress 😉
Do you believe that TFG will ever pay criminally for his actions?
This is the top question I receive. One thing is clear: the entire criminal justice system has collapsed in its ability to hold Trump accountable for his actions. I'm not so much speaking of prosecutors in the Biden era—as the chance to bring justice to Trump really only began when he was out of office, as Barr blocked any significant law enforcement action prior to that, and of course while in office Trump couldn't be prosecuted (though that's probably arguable, as he could likely be *indicted* if not prosecuted) and had the pardon power. But the FBI, CIA, DIA, NSA, Pentagon, and others fell down during the Trump administration—that's clear. Some of the IGs trying to do due diligence were fired, true, but others simply took their time, allowed Barr to scuttle investigations, or lacked courage in their reports or got cold feet ex ante. A level of secrecy was permitted to surround Trumpworld and its illicit actions that never surrounded any case involving high-profile Democratic politicians. Criminal referrals from Congress got ignored by DOJ, true, but then the FBI also conducted a sham investigation of Kavanaugh, leaked to the 2016 Trump campaign, and lied to the NYT in late October 2016. And on and on. The attempt to prosecute now Trump is hurt by all his pardons of key witnesses, and by the fact that so many are convinced that if they can delay any future criminal cases long enough, Trump will return to office and pardon them. Trump has long been tampering—publicly and privately, per Congressional reports—with the relevant witnesses. They've had years to synchronize stories, destroy evidence, develop false narratives, and so on. And any prosecutor in Georgia or New York or D.C. or at DOJ who takes on Trump knows their life will be in danger and that their political career and personal life will be affected by their decision permanently. That's a lot to take on, though yes, it's their job.
I do believe that there will be at least one attempt to indict Trump somewhere; I believe the case will drag on for years; and that it seems likely Trump will either return to the White House or die of natural causes before the case ends, or that in the miraculous event that it ends in a reasonable timeframe and he is convicted, the charge brought and his lack of a prior record (incredibly) and his status as an ex-president could save him from jail-time. I certainly do believe he would flee the country to evade prison. So the answer is, no, there will never be *full* justice for all he has done. There is a Hail Mary chance there may be *some* justice, but it will take a long, long time and probably extend beyond a possible or even likely Trump run in 2024. What would increase the odds if it a large enough case is built against a member of Trump's inner circle first that they flip dramatically: I am hoping this will be Giuliani or Barrack. But Kushner or Don Jr. would in theory be a candidate. I just think the Democratic Party is averse to seeming "political" by just dispensing owed justice that Garland is going to have to be a *very* independent thinker to do the right thing(s).
Thank you for your detailed response. I must say I totally agree with you. Thank you for all you do
TY as well for all the specifics. If not Trump, what about any accountability for J6 leaders/organizers? This all doesn't seem to bode well for democracy holding for very long..
Do you think it's just too politically dangerous for Trump to face actual legal responsibility, and the best case outcome might end up being Trump gets off scot free, but a multitude of safeguards are put into place legally to prevent what Trump did from ever happening again with someone else? It seems like the people in power are rightly afraid of a wave of craziness & potential violence that could kick off if Trump is ever truly held accountable, locked up, etc.
I believe you have it pegged: the Democratic Party believes it is "safer" for Trump to just go away, even if it means letting him run in 2024. They believe he'd lose and that, having lost, he would disappear. I think it's a dangerous game of chicken that in the bargain wounds our rule of law and Americans' belief in our justice system and our democracy. I also think only a fool would see Trump in this way—it's such a profound misunderstanding of the clear and present danger threat he represents.
As an attorney, I believe you uphold the law at all costs. Anything less is a betrayal of the oath our officials took and all lawyers take. That I took. But yes, I think many in DC think this way.
If that’s what the dems are thinking…..(?) Way to dangerous to think “he’d lose and go away!” That’s just too dang logical AND hopeful! He’s way too evil and sinister !
That's a horribly depressing thought and would mean we have a dysfunctional justice system, one that is so bad it would need to be scrapped and replaced before we could ever trust "the system" again. It is essentially conceding that a relatively small group of armed bullies can override the system at will.
Percent chance that 1 trump actually faces a trial and 2 that all any/all of the j6 leaders/planners face the same? It’s so demoralizing to see blatant crime go unpunished let alone unacknowledged by doj. Lastly will seditionists ever be booted from Congress?
Again not looking for anything definitive just your odds on this.
I think the odds are moderate to high that mid-level insurrectionist leaders—at least a couple of them—ultimately face *some* justice. Those at the very top? The odds are very long. Our system treats the rich, powerful, and famous with kid gloves you would never see in any case—*any* case—involving a "regular human."
Will PROOF have, sometime in the future, in one article, a chronological summary timeline of the whereabouts (meetings) of all the insurrectionist planners? TY Seth.
It's *possible*, but the question is how long it will be before we have enough specific (tick-tock) info to do that yet. For now we have these early attempts at a broader view:
1: https://sethabramson.substack.com/p/exclusive-a-comprehensive-overview
2: https://sethabramson.substack.com/p/a-comprehensive-guide-to-those-responsible
Any indication that Kristi Noem is in on this ? She’s spent what seems to be an inordinate amount of time with Trump
I don't think she was in his inner circle, no. But would she like to be now? I wonder. When she sent privately funded troops from SD to the southern border, it underscored how dangerously lawless she is—if the death toll in SD due to her deliberate negligence weren't enough indication. Like Nikki Haley or any other Trumpist who wants to be "the woman on Trump's next campaign ticket"—their thinking/construction, it seems, not mine—she does not believe in anything except her own acquisition of power. Elise Stefanik is in this camp as well.
Why wasn’t Mike Lindell there? I’m curious about the blue jackets everyone is wearing. They look like a bunch of sorority brothers.
I have a report coming soon on where Lindell was at that moment on January 5. It appears to have been in Virginia. But who he was with... that's a story. Stay tuned. Working on it now.
Thanks, this is a blockbuster. Excellent work.