Jump to content
henrygandorf

impeachment inquiry hearings thread

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Just shave it all off, Lev:

 

mail?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.msnbc.com%2Fsites%2Fmsnbc%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2Fratio--3-2--512x342%2Fpublic%2Fvideos%2Fn_maddow_biden_200116_1920x1080.jpg%3Fitok%3DryyppZXQ&t=1579291860&ymreqid=9bc22188-9d5f-114a-1c3f-f7012c01e700&sig=.v8Zgi_AAjFvNctynFKNTg--~C

Tells his barber:  "Just give me the Charlie Brown and a shave*."

(*One of the late nite hosts used that line).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tuco said:

The texts between Harry Sargeant and Parnas are revealing, and surprising to me.  At the beginning of each conversation, there is a count of messages.  For most of the conversations, it's maybe 200-500.  For Sargeant, it's 2745 messages.  There is a lot in that conversation which they haven't released.

 

That was something I, too, found interesting. Sargeant is in Florida, and Parnas has been in Florida for quite awhile according to that article I posted the link to last night. He was selling real estate to Russians apparently (I can't recall if the article said that was linked to Trump condos to or not, I'll have to go back and reread it-it was a very long researched article) so these two have been circulating for awhile although in at least one of the texts, Sargeant was a little dismissive at times but as he pointed out in one of the texts he was having drinks with Otto so maybe he was drunk texting. I doubt they were BFFs as my kids would say, but I cannot believe the remainder are all media articles that they both seemed fond of reading.

I wonder if the Feds got Hyde's phone in time and if so, if there was anything on it. Was Sargeant doing the actual monitoring, or am I correct in that he was helping Parnas by paying someone to do it? Who was actually watching her, how, and with what means?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Foosters said:

It's what liars say when they know there is evidence to refute their denial. Gives them an out. 

Or in James Comey's case, 245 outs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That was something I, too, found interesting. Sargeant is in Florida, and Parnas has been in Florida for quite awhile according to that article I posted the link to last night. He was selling real estate to Russians apparently (I can't recall if the article said that was linked to Trump condos to or not, I'll have to go back and reread it-it was a very long researched article) so these two have been circulating for awhile although in at least one of the texts, Sargeant was a little dismissive at times but as he pointed out in one of the texts he was having drinks with Otto so maybe he was drunk texting. I doubt they were BFFs as my kids would say, but I cannot believe the remainder are all media articles that they both seemed fond of reading.
I wonder if the Feds got Hyde's phone in time and if so, if there was anything on it. Was Sargeant doing the actual monitoring, or am I correct in that he was helping Parnas by paying someone to do it? Who was actually watching her, how, and with what means?

I think Hyde was either fucking with Lev, possibly trying to scam him, or just crazy. There is a lot of weirdness overall, but I would be surprised if that angle has legs. I think Hyde’s main involvement is either in the PR side (which also seems like a scam) or possibly as a straw donor.

There is an article out there about how Lev made the LBG pitch to Sargeant in early 2019. It implied they didn’t know each other previously, but who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I guess it depends on how wide your circle of influence is. There's temporary influence and the transaction of getting things done, there's your solid inner circle, and so on. Because each wants something and we know none of these people personally, it's always hard to sort out especially since no one will go on the record as knowing anything or anybody. Like my teen saying "I have no recollection of those events," when being asked about why the dishwasher wasn't loaded and run after supper...

So, two new additions. Another mobster circling around the group. Concerned about corruption in Ukraine? Uh-huh. The video by Parnas' attorney was already posted, but Wendy is good with back story.

Here is Hyde popping up again:

At this point, he does seem to be a useful idiot to Parnas et al but he was in some ways coordinating with that Belgian that is now being linked to the surveillance of Yovanovitch.

 

The biggest thing to come out of this might be the negotiation of the quid pro quo between Parnas and Lutsenko. They never suspected that it would unravel with the elections in a couple of days with Zelinsky's win. That does imply though doesn't it, that they did not have a robust network in the ambassador's office if they did not know how the polls were trending. Didn't she say in her testimony that the polls were showing Z had a lot of support from the electorate (not the corrupt people already in Ukraine's govt)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I guess it depends on how wide your circle of influence is. There's temporary influence and the transaction of getting things done, there's your solid inner circle, and so on. Because each wants something and we know none of these people personally, it's always hard to sort out especially since no one will go on the record as knowing anything or anybody. Like my teen saying "I have no recollection of those events," when being asked about why the dishwasher wasn't loaded and run after supper...
So, two new additions. Another mobster circling around the group. Concerned about corruption in Ukraine? Uh-huh. The video by Parnas' attorney was already posted, but Wendy is good with back story.
[/url] Here is Hyde popping up again:
At this point, he does seem to be a useful idiot to Parnas et al but he was in some ways coordinating with that Belgian that is now being linked to the surveillance of Yovanovitch.
 
The biggest thing to come out of this might be the negotiation of the quid pro quo between Parnas and Lutsenko. They never suspected that it would unravel with the elections in a couple of days with Zelinsky's win. That does imply though doesn't it, that they did not have a robust network in the ambassador's office if they did not know how the polls were trending. Didn't she say in her testimony that the polls were showing Z had a lot of support from the electorate (not the corrupt people already in Ukraine's govt)?

Ukraine has a jungle primary ahead of the final vote. Zelensky was considerably ahead of Poroshenko in that vote, and he was splitting with other reform candidates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the tweet Lockhart had tweeted prior to yours, as well:

If a reporter was actually confronted with that in real life, saying, "Ok, now do Putin," might result in an interesting moment.

Edited by Mrs Whiggins
Addition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you see these low life characters like lev or Robert Hyde come out of the woodwork, it makes you realize that trump must have brought many idiots like this into govt or into the gop party leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

When you see these low life characters like lev or Robert Hyde come out of the woodwork, it makes you realize that trump must have brought many idiots like this into govt or into the gop party leadership.

The loss of experience and qualified people in the government is staggering. It is a shell running on fumes. Rebuilding the structure, especially the State Dept is going to be one of the bigger jobs for the next president if we get rid of this one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

The loss of experience and qualified people in the government is staggering. It is a shell running on fumes. Rebuilding the structure, especially the State Dept is going to be one of the bigger jobs for the next president if we get rid of this one. 

In the back of my mind I've gone full Brisket and figure their (GOP) back up strategy (if Trump is out) is full on civil war using whatever police/military/militia white supremacist supporters they can muster to cause chaos and unrest. Then they begin the process of dismantling what remains of the full and fair electoral system so we have what all the other unstable countries have.

But, if the republic and America can hold on, we better get to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All appearances of obstruction of Congress aside, now is the time for all you FISA freaks and rockin' Deep Staters to really shine.  Or come to grips with consequences of erroneously crying wolf all that time.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The loss of experience and qualified people in the government is staggering. It is a shell running on fumes. Rebuilding the structure, especially the State Dept is going to be one of the bigger jobs for the next president if we get rid of this one. 


When considering the fucked up situation in Ukraine, with the President’s men working against an appointed ambassador for corrupt ends, remember that we had no ambassador in Saudi Arabia and Kushner was representing then President’s interests there. During that time, we supported them in Yemen, supported an embargo of Qatar, and had a US resident beheaded in their embassy. We are only focused on Ukraine because of a whistleblower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not believe we will ever know half of what they got up to. Obstruction and destruction (of evidence) has been so prolific and ongoing that unlike Iran-Contra, etc it will be largely unwritten and undiscovered. Prince's exploits all over the globe, Sargeant funding who knows what with his military connections, Barr's cronies, all of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dersh was on Jake Tapper, selling his shit.  He opines that even if Trump did what the House says he did, that is not impeachable.   He agrees that because there is no Constitutionally supported impeachable event, there is no need to call witnesses.

The unquestioned truth of the Trump fan demographic is that the less education you have, the more likely you are to be a Trump voter.   And so, Trump has the advantage in that for his supporters to know that he should be impeached, they have to know that the GOP/Fox/Rush/Freeper version of Constitutional law is wrong.  And the majority of Trump supporters could not tell you which Article of the Constitution says what and applied how, or to whom.  Nor could they even begin to articulate the intent of the Framers on that issue, as Fox tells them what they need to know in a manner they can absorb - "Trump is allowed to withhold funds if they won't go after that dirty Hunter Biden, and he is President, so he can withhold them if he wants.  Anyway, they got the money so no harm done..."

There will be no pressure on any GOP Senator to do the right thing.   Their voting base is secure in their knowledge that Trump did nothing wrong, and they do not have the education or capacity to understand they are being fed easily searchable and refuted lies. Dobbs, Carlson, Hannity, the Interchangeable Fox Blondes - they all conspire to keep that viewership as ignorant as possible.  Impeachment is a political process, and the political optics mean that no pressure will be applied to GOP Senators.   We have to count on their inherent patriotism and honor to uphold the institutions of our government.  

In other words, we are fucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, triplehorn said:

All appearances of obstruction of Congress aside, now is the time for all you FISA freaks and rockin' Deep Staters to really shine.  Or come to grips with consequences of erroneously crying wolf all that time.

 

 

I'm sure anastasia will be happy to derail another thread for a week or two about this, since he cares so much about the intel community

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dersh was on Jake Tapper, selling his shit.  He opines that even if Trump did what the House says he did, that is not impeachable.   He agrees that because there is no Constitutionally supported impeachable event, there is no need to call witnesses.
The unquestioned truth of the Trump fan demographic is that the less education you have, the more likely you are to be a Trump voter.   And so, Trump has the advantage in that for his supporters to know that he should be impeached, they have to know that the GOP/Fox/Rush/Freeper version of Constitutional law is wrong.  And the majority of Trump supporters could not tell you which Article of the Constitution says what and applied how, or to whom.  Nor could they even begin to articulate the intent of the Framers on that issue, as Fox tells them what they need to know in a manner they can absorb - "Trump is allowed to withhold funds if they won't go after that dirty Hunter Biden, and he is President, so he can withhold them if he wants.  Anyway, they got the money so no harm done..."
There will be no pressure on any GOP Senator to do the right thing.   Their voting base is secure in their knowledge that Trump did nothing wrong, and they do not have the education or capacity to understand they are being fed easily searchable and refuted lies. Dobbs, Carlson, Hannity, the Interchangeable Fox Blondes - they all conspire to keep that viewership as ignorant as possible.  Impeachment is a political process, and the political optics mean that no pressure will be applied to GOP Senators.   We have to count on their inherent patriotism and honor to uphold the institutions of our government.  
In other words, we are fucked.

More and more, y’all are getting it. The rule of law is whatever the GOP criminal syndicates says it is.
Game’s over, even though there’s still time technically on the clock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

The Dersh was on Jake Tapper, selling his shit.  He opines that even if Trump did what the House says he did, that is not impeachable.   He agrees that because there is no Constitutionally supported impeachable event, there is no need to call witnesses.

The unquestioned truth of the Trump fan demographic is that the less education you have, the more likely you are to be a Trump voter.   And so, Trump has the advantage in that for his supporters to know that he should be impeached, they have to know that the GOP/Fox/Rush/Freeper version of Constitutional law is wrong.  And the majority of Trump supporters could not tell you which Article of the Constitution says what and applied how, or to whom.  Nor could they even begin to articulate the intent of the Framers on that issue, as Fox tells them what they need to know in a manner they can absorb - "Trump is allowed to withhold funds if they won't go after that dirty Hunter Biden, and he is President, so he can withhold them if he wants.  Anyway, they got the money so no harm done..."

There will be no pressure on any GOP Senator to do the right thing.   Their voting base is secure in their knowledge that Trump did nothing wrong, and they do not have the education or capacity to understand they are being fed easily searchable and refuted lies. Dobbs, Carlson, Hannity, the Interchangeable Fox Blondes - they all conspire to keep that viewership as ignorant as possible.  Impeachment is a political process, and the political optics mean that no pressure will be applied to GOP Senators.   We have to count on their inherent patriotism and honor to uphold the institutions of our government.  

In other words, we are fucked.

That was what I've been seeing around the webs: that another reason Trump chose Dershowitz and Starr was that they have media personalities and can get in front of the narrative prior to Tuesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I do not believe we will ever know half of what they got up to. Obstruction and destruction (of evidence) has been so prolific and ongoing that unlike Iran-Contra, etc it will be largely unwritten and undiscovered. Prince's exploits all over the globe, Sargeant funding who knows what with his military connections, Barr's cronies, all of it.

Even worse, obstruction and destruction of evidence are just part of the effort to evade accountability. Resonating cries of fake news and alternative facts undermine the reality that is somehow documented. And now we've got the National Archives joining Team Propaganda. Archivists altering the historical record seems like a bad sign for a free country.

National Archives apologizes for altering image critical of Trump

Quote

The National Archives put out an apology on Saturday after admitting to digitally altering a photo with references they deemed inappropriate, including signs critical of President Donald Trump.

"We made a mistake," the National Archives, a facility of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), said in a statement on Saturday, adding "we are and have always been completely committed to preserving our archival holdings, without alteration."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

we are and have always been completely committed to preserving our archival holdings, without alteration."

Well, no, obviously not, because you wouldn't have altered the photos had that been your "committed" policy.

Kudos for "we made a mistake", but just follow it up with "it has never happened before and it won't happen again".

I hate that kind of word-smithing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Worrisome that someone spotted the photo, but people tend to notice mistakes in things like that. What they miss are the documents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


More and more, y’all are getting it. The rule of law is whatever the GOP criminal syndicates says it is.
Game’s over, even though there’s still time technically on the clock.

I'm going to grant you unquestioned first-on-the-ledge status Brisket, but I take exception with your inference that I am a recent convert.   I will say that AG Barr was a wild card here, and that his handling of the Mueller report and general disregard for the duties of his office went beyond any of my negative expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I'm going to grant you unquestioned first-on-the-ledge status Brisket, but I take exception with your inference that I am a recent convert.   I will say that AG Barr was a wild card here, and that his handling of the Mueller report and general disregard for the duties of his office went beyond any of my negative expectations.

There have been any number of curve balls that Team Not Trump has had to sustain, some self-inflicted, some not.  I recall in my naivete thinking that a US attorney like Barr wouldn't act the stooge when it came to dealing with Trump, but boy was I wrong.  Mueller didn't exactly drive the nail home, either.  Prior to him, Comey's self-serving nature got him out over his skis.  Pelosi and crew haven't exactly nailed the impeachment strategy, although that's somewhat forgivable, as they were plowing new political ground, at least for them.

So, as has been the case all along, the future of the Republic depends not only on the motivation of the majority of voters, but also on the degree to which the right will influence, suppress, and outright hack the voting process.  I understand the perverse thrill someone like Brisket gets in being as cynical as possible, but the truth is, nobody has a crystal ball, and the best strategy going forward will largely hinge on getting out the vote.  Control what can be controlled, the rest is gonna happen regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

Even worse, obstruction and destruction of evidence are just part of the effort to evade accountability. Resonating cries of fake news and alternative facts undermine the reality that is somehow documented. And now we've got the National Archives joining Team Propaganda. Archivists altering the historical record seems like a bad sign for a free country.

National Archives apologizes for altering image critical of Trump

 

spacer.png

tactic seems familiar...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

In other words, we are fucked.

We know the Senate will cover for him, and because of how it plays out, they will be doing so very visibly.   

Who will be more inspired to get out and vote?   Pissed off Dems and moderates, or smug Trumpkins?

And how is Trump going to pull off Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Arizona?  Well, scratch Arizona, that’s a lost cause.  And plenty in Wisconsin are furious that the taxpayers got publicly fucked over Foxcon.  

So that’s 21 electoral votes gone.   And that’s before we start talking about anger in Michigan.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

In the back of my mind I've gone full Brisket and figure their (GOP) back up strategy (if Trump is out) is full on civil war using whatever police/military/militia white supremacist supporters they can muster to cause chaos and unrest. Then they begin the process of dismantling what remains of the full and fair electoral system so we have what all the other unstable countries have.

But, if the republic and America can hold on, we better get to work.

The police, military, etc. do not want the chaos and unrest that you think they can cause, because that means they stop getting paychecks, the local grocery stores stop getting food, the power stops working, their families start having problems feeding and taking care of themselves, not to mention that if you have chaos, cops and their families are going to have a big bullseye on their back.  And there won’t be working phones or radios to call for backup.  

Let’s say Trumpkins appeal to the militias.  Bubba in his double-wide meets up with his militia.    They are going to come into conflict with the local cops.  Let’s say they kill some cops, maybe take control of a town hall.   Then what?  The state police, National Guard, and feds are going to run a train on Bubba and Co.   

 If the GOP foments chaos, that is going to create a lot of bad shit for the BMDs of the GOP   It could wreck insurance companies, banks, power companies, oil & gas companies, manufacturers, food companies, etc.and the list goes on.  There are a shit-ton of BMDs who would lose billions in wealth of a civil war erupted   

Hell, we don’t bail out car companies or farmers because we give a shit about a few tens of thousands of auto workers and a few thousand family farms, we do it because there are BMDs, whether they are wealthy investors or companies, who will lean on Republicans, and who will switch their allegiance to the Democrats In a heartbeat if the Rs don’t give them what they want. 

If Trump is somehow out, the GOP’s absolute best strategy is to get Pence or another complacent Republican who can do better at the polls against the dems, into place ASAP, and that’s what they will do   

 

Edited by atomheartbevo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I am clearly a bit behind. How was Nunes allowed to participate in question and not forced to recuse himself given his clearl conflict of interest? Only involvement he should have been was to testify in the House. Or, is his level of involvement new information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pacman said:

Okay, I am clearly a bit behind. How was Nunes allowed to participate in question and not forced to recuse himself given his clearl conflict of interest? Only involvement he should have been was to testify in the House. Or, is his level of involvement new information?

Although it was suspected, the information was not made public really until the inquiry was winding down, IIRC. He had already had an ethics violation from (what was it? 2017?)  that ended up being dropped I think. Also, a lot of the shouting diversion tactics worked. It made the Trump supporters place pressure on the Democrats when the loudest voices needed to be Americans hollering for Nunes removal as majority  leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, pacman said:

Okay, I am clearly a bit behind. How was Nunes allowed to participate in question and not forced to recuse himself given his clearl conflict of interest? Only involvement he should have been was to testify in the House. Or, is his level of involvement new information?

Who would make him recuse himself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Who would make him recuse himself?

Well, he recruited himself earlier so why isn't this at least being discussed?  Further evidence these cats are corrupt to the core.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parnas is asking Barr to recuse himself, on the basis that there would be a conflict of interest, and specifically that Barr slowed down the release of documents and has blocked US attorneys of the SDNY from meeting with Parnas, because if he was able to make a deal, it would hurt the President. We live in interesting, albeit shitty, times. (Disclaimer: there have been plenty of other times prior shittier than ours, I just thought we had evolved.) 

 

CNN

Edited by Tuco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parnas is asking Barr to recuse himself, on the basis that there would be a conflict of interest, and specifically that Barr slowed down the release of documents and has blocked US attorneys of the SDNY from meeting with Parnas, because if he was able to make a deal, it would hurt the President. We live in interesting, albeit shitty, times. (Disclaimer: there have been plenty of other times prior shittier than ours, I just thought we had evolved.) 
 
CNN

It will never happen, but Barr really needs to see the inside of a prison cell for a prolonged duration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just Security recommends 15 questions the media should be asking Lev Parnas.  They are excellent questions.  Unfortunately, the mainstream media generally spends more time on make-up and wardrobe than on research. 

Quote

The Questions

1. List all the individuals who can corroborate your specific claims. What other specific documents and records that have not been released to the public would corroborate your claims?

2. Exactly when and how did you first meet Rudy Giuliani?

3. Exactly when and how did the idea of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe and/or Hunter Biden first arise, to your knowledge?

Background: The New York Times has referred to Parnas’s “first trip to Ukraine in February 2019,” but it’s unclear whether that was his first time in Ukraine on this mission or just his first time there that year. Parnas was born in Ukraine, though he has long lived in the United States and is a U.S. citizen.

4. Was Rudy Giuliani involved in other work in Ukraine that you had any connection with or knowledge of, other than this mission to persuade the Ukrainian government to announce investigations of Biden? 

5. Can you speak to whether Trump thought that the efforts with Ukraine authorities could benefit your or Giuliani’s or others’ business dealings?

6. Similarly, do you know whether Trump thought that the efforts with Ukraine could benefit Giuliani, Victoria Toensing, or Joe DiGenova in their being hired by former and incumbent Ukraine officials (per the NYT and Post’s reporting a few months ago)? Where any of those contracts with the Ukrainian the former and incumbent officials completed and carried out? 

Background for Questions 5 & 6: If Trump knew an effect would be to direct business toward Giuliani or Parnas, it may trigger liability for the President under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). See Susan Simpson’s important analysis of Giuliani and Parnas’s activities in relation to the Ukraine effort and the FCPA.

7. You have talked almost exclusively about your and your associates’ roles in relation to the effort to persuade the Ukrainian government to announce investigations into Joe and/or Hunter Biden. What discussions did you have with anyone about Giuliani’s and Trump’s belief that the Ukrainian government tried to interfere in the 2016 election in opposition to Trump and in favor of Hillary Clinton?

8. Who all was part of the “team” that you have mentioned that was involved in carrying out this mission? Name all the members and their roles.

9. You have been described at times by pro-Trump Washington lawyers Victoria Toensing and Joe DiGenova, as well as Giuliani and others as a “translator,” but your role extended at least to that of a fixer, right? How would you describe your role in this effort?

10. Where exactly did you travel in the course of this mission, and who paid for the travel in each instance? Who paid for Giuliani’s travel and other expenses?

11. The WhatsApp messages that the House committees released on Jan. 14 show that Giuliani messaged you on July 3, 2019, asking, “Where are you guys?” And you responded, “Going to Vienna.” And he replied, “Wow!” Who were “you guys,” and why did Giuliani respond with that kind of excitement?

Background: This was around the time that Kremlin-linked Ukrainian oligarch Dmitry Firtash, a fugitive fighting U.S. extradition while living in Vienna, hired Toensing and DiGenova in the scheme to get dirt on the Bidens. Firtash later says he paid the couple $1.2 million as of November 2019, including a referral fee for Parnas.

12. What is your understanding of the arrangement between Giuliani, Toensing, DiGenova? Was the arrangement deliberately structured so that the team would have the “cover” of attorney-client privilege to not disclose their foreign clients and their being directed by the Trump legal team?

Background: Before taking the February 2019 trip to Ukraine, Parnas met with Giuliani in Manhattan to discuss details. Parnas told Giuliani that he and Fruman were concerned about not having diplomatic credentials for their mission, according to the Times:

Mr. Parnas said he proposed that the president designate them “special envoys” to ensure their safety and access. Then, Mr. Parnas said, Mr. Giuliani walked away to call Mr. Trump, and returned with a new plan: He would represent Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman, as well as the president, a move that might afford their shared mission the confidentiality of attorney-client privilege. Mr. Giuliani has denied Mr. Parnas’s account.

13. Why was Toensing, as indicated in several of the texts you provided to the House committees, so desperate for Yovanovitch to be removed? Did Toensing’s retention of Ukrainian or other clients require Yovanovitch’s removal? Which clients? Why?

14. What was/is Toensing and DiGenova’s connection to Trump’s legal team?

15. You have said you were lobbying Trump in April 2018 to have Marie Yovanovitch removed as the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. That was almost a year before your efforts with Giuliani to have the Ukrainian government announce a Biden investigation. Why, and on whose behalf, were you seeking Yovanovitch’s removal in the spring of 2018?

Background: Parnas told Maddow that he personally told Trump at a dinner at the Trump hotel on April 30, 2018, that Yovanovitch was badmouthing him and saying he was going to get impeached, and Trump responded by turning to an aide and saying “fire her.” Also, the federal indictment of Parnas alleges that he was lobbying a member of Congress as early as April 2018 to have Yovanovitch removed at the behest of one or more Ukrainian officials, at least one of which apparently was then-Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be slightly related, but tomorrow is the deadline for the Dept of Energy to turn over communications regarding  Perry/McCormack with Ukraine to the US Attorney's Office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

This may be slightly related, but tomorrow is the deadline for the Dept of Energy to turn over communications regarding  Perry/McCormack with Ukraine to the US Attorney's Office.

Call me crazy, but I don't think they're gonna make that deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Call me crazy, but I don't think they're gonna make that deadline.

Call me crazy, I think it has been proven that "deadlines" are more "suggestions" and no one is going to do fuck all about it when they don't turn over shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2020 at 10:53 AM, Biff Tannen said:

Call me crazy, I think it has been proven that "deadlines" are more "suggestions" and no one is going to do fuck all about it when they don't turn over shit.

They did meet the deadline....sort of...but curiously, a lot of items were *missing*

This little item needs more play since Perry never gave a deposition, and Sargeant turned up a lot more on Parnas' phone than he would have you believe. The article at the link gives more details.

Sargeant denies this is a big deal, naturally, but if he didn't know about the money funneling through the PAC, the gas deal that needed the Ambassador out of the way, and the rest of it despite the texts proving otherwise, then he is LYING. They all LIE, LIE, LIE and nothing happens.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would make more sense that Barr was there to prevent more arrests, or possibly a failed attempt to stop the Parnas/Furman arrests, than to initiate the arrests.  They were on their way out of the country.  I rather doubt they were planning on complying with the Congressional subpoenas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've been holding subcommittee meetings. Not sure about any investigative stuff at the mo. Speculating that the minority reps who 'boycotted' probably were out stumping for Trump.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...