A Bolton corroboration would be nice. Because I don't much trust Parnas on his own.

But Barr is in an awful position. He's in charge of the prosecution of Parnas. And simultaneously it sounds like a direct participant in the actions of Parnas? I think he should probably recuse himself at some point? Because if Parnas charges get dropped or something, it won't look good at all.

Point of clarity to hopefully drive it home (yeah right) to the ball washers.

They were pushing for an announcement of an investigation into Biden. They were not pushing for an actual investigation. They didn’t give a shit about whether or not Biden was investigated. They only cared about an announcement.

It had nothing to do with corruption. It had everything to do with hurting Trumps main rival.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Why Yovanovitch was targeted:

She was in the way to get the announcement re investigations of the Bidens.

Re Hyde:

Hyde is “a weird character.” He would hang out at Trump Hotel. Always drunk.

Re Hyde’s texts:

He was either drunk or trying to make himself bigger. I mostly didn’t respond much. I was warned to stay away from him. I do not believe Yovanovitch was ever in any danger.

Re AG Barr:

He was basically on the team.

It is ridiculous that Barr has not recused. The whistleblower also said Barr was involved.

Barr should probably be disbarred.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Re Firtash:

Firtash team said Andrew Weissmann (Mueller prosecutor) was doing something illegal. We were tasked to get that information in order to try to discredit the Mueller investigation. John Solomon gave me certain documents and we had to promise Firtash that his case would be worked out (his extradition case). Two Fox News lawyers went on the payroll of Firtash to work on his extradition case getting dropped. This was all linked to getting Ukraine to announce the investigation into the Bidens, as well as the earlier attempts to discredit the Mueller investigation.

Re Barr:

I heard many people talking on the phone with Barr. He knew everything that was going on. He was basically on the team.

(Recall Barr expressed surprise about why Trump mentioned him on the July call.)

What does 'dis Bard have to do with it?

All the President's men comes to mind.

How many quid pro quos are there? Seriously.

Re Nunes:

We met a few times at Trump hotel. Then I was introduced to his aide Derek Harvey and told Nunes couldn’t get too involved because he was on the Ethics Committee. Nunes already knew a lot of what was going on. I was in shock watching the hearings with Nunes chairing the hearing, and it was hard and scary to see them lie so much.

From the right “ it’s ok, cuz he is OUR lying sack of shit. Forget? Hell!

Part 2 tomorrow, including details re Rick Perry and Mike Pompeo.

Think it will get good ratings...

Some key takeaways:

Pence, Pompeo, Barr, Giuliani, Nunes, Bolton, and many others were directly involved and knew everything.

Parnas worked for Trump and Giuliani and spoke with them directly on a constant basis.
Trump knew everything.

More than just military aid was withheld - all aid was withheld - essentially everything was contingent on a public announcement and more.

Parnas once again claimed Trump didn't give a shit about corruption in Ukraine.

Parnas is willing to testify.

Be really funny if he testifies and Republicans try and dismiss him because he is indicted for crimes. He could just be like, "You mean the crime that was giving you a bunch of money, just to clarify I can't be trusted because you took my money?"

Barr is in an awful position if you thing of him as the AG. If you think of him as a coconspirator, he's sitting in the catbird seat.

---

“Read the transcript.”

Trump is the republicans' OJ.

---

“Read the transcript.”

Fox News current headline:
Parnas, in rare interview, undermines House Dems' claims that Trump team surveilled Ukraine ambassador

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Odds are this will come to nothing, just like everything else.

This president stole money from veterans to have a portrait of himself painted and the GOP and supporters just yawned.

These new revelations will mean nothing.

This front page story is too too much. It should be interesting and then some. As a back page related story I would like to hear of the details as to how his felony investigation took off and how Parnas and Fruman were then apprehended at the airport on their way out of the country. That was one fine apprehension that Barr was probably unaware of beforehand.

Gphin picked heck of a time to come back.....

I was going to ask ACE yesterday if there was anything that could swing him on the impeachment. If the Parnas interview doesn’t, then nothing will.

The Firtash stuff is perhaps the worst. Cooking up dirt in exchange for quashing an extradition order, with FoxNews lawyers and the AG involved in the scheme, and all coordinated by Trump and Giuliani.

Now we know why Shokin gave that false affidavit claiming Biden wanted him fired because he was investigating Burisma. He gave that affidavit recently as part of Firtash’s defense. And why is team Trump trying to protect a corrupt Russian oligarch? How much deeper might those ties go with his property business?

Lev gonna need food taster...Cheeto man gonna get advice from Putin and Un on how to make folks disappear.

Pun intended but I am not joking. He's so fucking corrupt it's not funny at all.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Looks like the GOP has become a criminal organization. It is time for a real special council. Trump, Barr, Pompeo, and Nunes, and probably Graham and McConnell should resign today. I hope the voting public holds them accountable. Because the next AG needs to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

0.0001% chance that happens. That's probably generous.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Oh I know. As long as we have a propaganda entertainment network brainwashing 40% of America things are only going to get worse. If the Senate stands behind Trump we will have another Putin.

Ha Ha and right on cue we have a New disease ridden Caravan of migrants headed this way.

Rudy a month ago: “I certainly am not going to disavow them. I have no reason to doubt them. Everything I’ve known about them says they would not commit a crime,”

Rudy now: “Who cares?” he says in text. “Believe him at your peril.” Adds that he feels sorry for “him and his family.”

(the big issue for this and the president - on top of the allegations, some of which are backed up with documents - is why does the president surround himself with people who 1) he calls very trustworthy, 2) then calls liars. This does not seem like "the best" people arguments we heard.

In a normal world where Republican Senators weren't afraid of Trump all of this would be a bombshell and the death blow to any discussion of acquittal.

---

Suffer Well.

That explains the stance of GOP Senators and members of the House, but what is the defense for people like ACE and Spntrxi who say this is just all politics on both sides?

Fox Noise and Limbaugh and the rest of the Alt right spin machine.

That a fair question for them. I forget, did they vote from him or not?

I'm not sure that Fox or Rush are an adequate explanation. "But my 409k" seems like pretty insignificant hill to die on. As does "judicial."

I doubt we will truly understand.

---

Suffer Well.

Do you think trump has added materially to economy? Would Karich or Jeb following Ryan lead have done just as well with their likely economic plans? Trump really doesn’t have plan other than vote buying....well guess dems buy votes too, but seems like social justice beats trickle down.

Ukraine FINALLY announces an investigation...

https://www.foxnews.com/...chment-document-dump

Short answer no.

I have yet to see evidence that there are many decisions or executive actions that a President can take to positively impact the economy within his term.

I don't think his tariffs, the tax cut as executed, or the current budget deficit ($1.10T for 2020 any only adds to an insane amount of debt) are in the best interest of this nation short or long term.

Sure, the stock market has improved... but not at an exceptional rate compared to his predecessors in the last 50 years.

So to your second question, I think had Jeb or Kasich not done tariffs or the tax cut we would have been better off.

---

Suffer Well.

Time magazine Aug 05 1974, "The fateful vote to impeach"

In our normal world of 1974, after seven months of investigation by the House Judiciary Committee, and with the Supreme Court earlier that week weighing in on the matter of releasing tapes of oval office discussions, 6 otherwise obscure Republican Congressmen joined with all 21 Democratic Congressman to vote out articles to impeach 27-11.

"The degree of bipartisanship in the judiciary vote was larger than had been expected, and it effectively rebutted the increasingly shrill claims from White House officials that the impeachment inquiry was a highly partisan "witch hunt" and that the committee amounted to a "kangaroo court".

Nixon then knew the cracks had formed.

I get that news organizations like to give their slant. But this is beyond the pale. Right now, go to Foxnews.com. Ctrl-F for "Parnas". Nothing. Do the same for "Yovan" and the only hit is "Donald Trump Jr. accuses Yovanovitch of 'monitoring' him, other Americans"

I know the right wing people here like to piss and moan about how every news org is biased. But this shit isn't comparable.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

See my post above for historical explanation and comparison. I can't speak for those guys. In no way is this all politics as there is plenty of there there. However it was never fairly allowed to gain bipartisanship and so it remains purely partisan.

Parnas, and a host of other rocks yet to be turned over are out there but are they in the impeach process?, subpoenas have been issued and ignored or subpoenas have not been issued; matters of legit, as well as pure BS, executive privilege are yet out there to be invoked or not; there remains complete stonewalling; and then there was the rush to impeach with a rock solid case on the grounds of impending doom and the weight of national security concerns only to then back off that grave concern of national security threat with a 4 week delay so that a couple four Republican Senators could bring themselves to revolt for witnesses.

Best case now going forward is the show trial with dirty linen hung out to dry. You want it bad you get it bad. Did not we have a whole bunch of threads and posts back in the Mueller days about the inherent badness in partisan impeaching?

Let Trump play the reality TV star he thinks himself to be. That is where we may end up. He will be as perfect as he was on his call. Ratings like never seen before on a performance of national embarrassment hopefully never to be seen again.

Mikey snuck back, or Slowman generously allowed a banned poster to come back under a new name to entertain the LR.

Not sure why he was banned, just obnoxious, unless I missed some of his posts which too many quotes in them...

Why is it that I keep thinking of the Blue Parrot and Signor Ferrari and not Rick's Cafe whenever there is mention of the Trump Hotel in DC.?

I'm not a fan of banning but Slowman covered it here.

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ing=slowman#p7069066

Once again, evidence emerges that reaffirms the sworn testimony implicating Trump and co., and nothing that conflicts or exonerates.

But, as we all know by now, it’s just more smoke without fire. Nothing to see here.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Kevin McCarthy says Parnas "lacks credibility" and "I don't know him" (despite photos of them together).

Maybe - crazy idea - we should hear from the likes of Bolton, Mulvaney, Perry, Barr, Giuliani, Pompeo etc. under oath, so we can learn if Parnas lacks credibility or not.

Rick Perry and Pompeo will be discussed by Parnas tonight.

Is Fox News really running a headline that is basically "Man Says He Was Not Involved in Crime." I mean his explanation does not explain why she was evacuated because of a threat to her security. And most importantly it does not explain why he said, "she’s not going to get away".

Now he may be right and it may be nothing, but I wouldn't put a lot of faith in the fact he did not admit to it on television. He was very careful to not mention anything that could be a crime, including making sure that he said he was working for the President, so he could say he did not violate FARA.

Ha Ha and right on cue we have a New disease ridden Caravan of migrants headed this way.


I was way off. I bet someone yesterday that there would be another terrorist planning an imminent attack taken out or a few bombs lobbed into Iran. Forgot about the old caravan of migrants...

That a fair question for them. I forget, did they vote from him or not?


No one here voted for him.

You must be new around here.

Oof. I regularly read Fox News article and opinion pieces so I can avoid echo chamber news, but I've never really gone to the mothership page. Wow, it's not a good look. Even without considering content, it looks like a DailyMail/Breitbart news aggregator - just a throwing a high density of lurid headlines out there and surrounding it with a shit-ton of ads.

I guess the video/cable dominates for them, and that's where their resources are. Just foreign to me since the only time I see cable TV News is passing through hotel lobbies, etc.

Maybe Hillary Clinton will be getting some phone calls from the GOP.

And yes, that's pink. Hillary never freaking killed anyone you whackjobs.

Trump denies (again) knowing Lev Parnas. Hands up who believes him. Anyone?

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Ivanka and Jared know him:



Jr knew him:



Rudy knew him:


KellyAnne knew him:


But Trump never heard of him. Perhaps his memory is failing.








He's really, really bad at lying.

---

Suffer Well.

I'm sure in the bowels of the GOP strategery room they've got the sharpie out and are drawing the flowchart.

1) He didn't know him.
2) If he knew him, they just talked about charity and stuff.
3) If they talked about interests of the U.S. government, it was all standard. Nothing campaign-related for sure.
4) If they talked about campaign-related stuff, there was no "quid pro quo."
5).If there was a quid pro quo discussed, it's OK, because nothing actually happened - was just fun talk.
6) OK, if a transaction actually took place, it's kinda standard (list historical examples), and was signed off on by the State Dept, etc. Everyone knew it was going on, typical stuff. Get over it.
7) OK, it it was never really signed off on and not really considered normal by paragons of ethics like Michael Bolton, it doesn't matter because it's not a crime. He's the President, folks. Might be unsavory, but this is the Get Things Done style we voted for! Get over the 2016 election, you lost.
8) If you want to argue it was a crime, doesn't even matter, can't bring charges while in office.
9) Also you can't convict on impeachment if there was no crime. See #8.

Trump was also asked the following questions about the letter Giuliani wrote to Zelensky where Giuliani said he was acting on Trump's personal behalf:

1. Did you approve Giuliani to write the letter?
2. What was the meeting Giuliani asked for going to be about?

Answer:

"I don't know about any letter," followed by 3 minute ramble about how great a mayor of NYC Giuliani was.

     Didn't Parnas say at some point he was there a couple times with Giulliani when Trump talked to RG? Even NPR this morning pointed out that Parnas is not claiming to have talked to Trump. More importantly, I'll leave this for those curious as to an initial response from the right:

https://www.redstate.com/...-are-the-highlights/

Parnas said he was with multiple people while they talked to Trump about Ukraine, including Giuliani. He also said he has been in fairly small meetings with Trump, though didn't specifically address whether the two spoke. But I think he did say they talked at fundraisers. Trump's line of argument is that he might have met him at a fundraiser or two but "doesn't remember any conversations we may have had." Note, that's different to saying, "we never had a conversation."

As for that article, definitely not "more importantly."

-
Yeah, I'd say don't go to foxnews.com. The few times I've been have been because someone here screamed bloody murder, and I found they were largely correct. The online version of Fox is more the Tucker/Hannity, Fox and Friends side; pretty hard right. The cable version has some shows I'll watch; Cavuto, The Five, Brett Baier, and Chris Wallace on Sunday, not that I see those shows regularly, but those are the ones I find decent and will watch. Of course Cavuto and Wallace are no fans of Trump, Baier is a pretty neutral newsman, and the Five at least has a token liberal (Juan Williams).

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-stays-up-all-night-with-sharpie-crossing-out-lev-parnas-in-photos-with-him?fbclid=IwAR1Ys3SDOwZyMt37Obd0VyvLrBKjIdLF8FNuHTP7sW84EFDnrcSqWPEdGNk

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

If you want to see the worst that humanity has to offer read the comments of articles on foxnews.com. They ran a story about Will Smith going to a receptionist's retirement and wow, just wow.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

It's utterly impossible for me to think that anyone could still pretend that supporters of the GOP value honesty. For at least a decade they've been showing you what they are and what they believe is important.

When are we, as a society, going to start believing them? When are we going to start treating them accordingly?

When either our two party system is replaced with something resembling choice, or the Democrats offer something just slightly more palatable.

'Till then, clear it off your list of hopes and dreams.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

In all seriousness, after everything their party figurehead has done... After everything they've supported... What does anyone imagine would have to happen for them to start voting for the only political party that's behaving like rational, responsible members of society?

I just can't believe we're still having conversations where we act like "honesty" is even remotely compatible with a person who supports this party.

When are we, as a society, going to start believing them? When are we going to start treating them accordingly?


Have you even checked your 401k?

It's doing pretty good. But my 409k is doing so much better.

---

Suffer Well.

It's a weird thing. For my work, I recently spent two weeks out at sea on a small vessel. The skipper was a former military guy. Solid guy. Competent, honest, patriotic. Smart. I got along fine with him, and if there were some incident he'd have put his life on the line for anyone on his boat. A lot of the time we were just station-keeping and he didn't have much to do, and he'd just watch right-wing video clips on his phone all day, just glancing up to check radar, etc. Occasionally he'd comment to no one in particular, "Oh look at what fucking Schiff and Pelosi are doing now, etc."

He genuinely believes Trump is a good guy. And a liberal hoax is out to get them. That's his reality.

There's a lot of people like this guy in the U.S.

He genuinely believes Trump is a good guy. And a liberal hoax is out to get them. That's his reality.

There's a lot of people like this guy in the U.S. //

You are not wrong. But when you think about it, should we be surprised? I mean even though 3 million more people voted for Hillary, there still were 60+ million who voted for Trump. And it would be silly to believe some of the left wingers, that only old white, racist, working class, uneducated males voted for him. We have to face the facts, about 1/2 the people you know voted for this guy, and most are going to stay with him. That means buying into anything and everything that helps them get around the bad shit he has been doing. I see a lot of that going on around me. I'm a bit encouraged in some of the Christian Right community that my family is part of, there is a growing split on whether the deal with the devil was/is worth it or not. But among my regular friends, like your captain, there just seems to be no bottom, and they will either prevail once again, or go down with the ship.


And I dont really have any uneducated, racist, working class(all 3 of these together) friends to speak of, so the half of my friends that did and still support trump, are basically like me I suppose. The only difference that I see on sites like FB is that they seem to be a lot more fervent in their support, and willing to put it out there in a very negative way. I suppose that goes to the justification process they are going through, while the friends like me, just sit back and think WTF?
.

Just saw Parnas on CNN with Anderson Cooper. Very different guy than I had in my mind. He appears to have reached Scaramucci Stage.

But I'm sure it's all the other guys that are lying and not Trump.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Parnas echoed much of what others like Sondland testified to. In fact, all the testimonies align. Anyone who believes Trump's denials and that this is all a hoax, is frankly an idiot.

But I still think there is more to come that could be even worse for Trump's camp. Watch MSNBC in 10 minutes...

I wouldn’t watch msnbc under any circumstance...

Of course you wouldn't. I don't normally, but hearing Parnas talk about Rick Perry and Mike Pompeo will be interesting. Probably wouldn't fit your narrative though.

apparently the Sheriff office knew him too..

So Jay Sekelow got the president’s permission for John Dowd to represent Lev Parnas (there is a letter proving this to be true), but yet Trump claims he doesn’t know Parnas.

You have to wonder why Rudy and Don would hang out with dudes like this. I'm betting you wouldn't, so why would they?

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

They clearly can't be trusted, they were Republican donors and also paying for the presidents lawyer. Be weird if they were not criminals.

they look about as honest as Trump.. which is not much. You can add Nadler and Schiff to the not honest looking bunch.

Ohh good comeback. So how many of Nadler's or Schiffs lawyers or campaign chairmen are in prison?

 
Feds are seeking a search warrant to look at Giuliani's electronic communications over his Ukraine dealings.

Source: NBC.

SDNY is also investigating Giuliani's finances. It seems some of these investigations/warrants were being kept quieter ahead of the election, but now, post-election, there is less sensitivity. Same as the Hunter Biden tax investigation.

At this point I'm just assuming anyone sucking up to Trump is just angling for a pardon. I saw Bannon was back in the White House yesterday.

 
In new court filing, Bill Barr accused of arresting impeachment witnesses to shield Trump

Lev Parnas, an indicted former associate of Rudy Giuliani, alleges his arrest was part of a plot to protect Trump

I thought this part about Dowd was interesting...

"After securing the president's personal approval, Dowd took Parnas as a client.
On Oct. 8, a Tuesday, Dowd sent an email to a number of attorneys affiliated with Trump's defense team, calling the president "Boss" and promising that Dowd would "eliminate any doubt" that Parnas and Fruman would answer questions before Congress. Dowd then sent a letter to House investigators informing them that Parnas and Fruman would not appear for their scheduled deposition on Thursday, Oct. 10. The next day, Parnas and Fruman were arrested. Two of the attorneys copied on Dowd's email were the same people who had been scheduled to fly with them to Europe."

https://www.nytimes.com/...1bcdba3a4ea9b85bdfd#

Should be an unlocked link.

Lev Parnas, Ex-Giuliani Ally, Is Convicted of Campaign Finance Charges
A federal jury found that Mr. Parnas and a second man funneled a Russian tycoon’s money to U.S. candidates to win favorable treatment for a marijuana business.

On Friday, Mr. Parnas’s activity as a political donor caught up with him, as a jury convicted him on all six counts he was facing. Mr. Kukushkin was also found guilty.

In a statement, Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said that Mr. Parnas and Mr. Kukushkin had conspired to manipulate the American political system to enrich themselves.

The verdict came after about six hours of deliberations, following testimony from, among others, a onetime finance director of a super PAC supporting Mr. Trump; an ex-chief of staff to a former Republican congressman from Texas; and the 2018 Republican candidate for governor of Nevada.

Prosecutors outlined a two-part scheme, saying Mr. Parnas had lied to the Federal Election Commission about certain campaign donations he had made and that he and Mr. Kukushkin had tried to gain favor among candidates with contributions tied to the Russian tycoon, Andrey Muraviev, with whom they were involved in a cannabis business.

“The purpose behind this conspiracy was influence buying,” a prosecutor, Hagan Cordell Scotten, said during closing arguments on Thursday, adding: “The voters would never know whose money was pouring into our elections.”

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com