talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--House Dems Release New Tranche Of Evidence From Giuliani Pal Lev Parnas

House Democrats on Wednesday released a second , much larger trove of documents from Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas .
The records included text messages , photos and other communications Parnas exchanged with key players in the Ukraine scandal , including the former Ukrainian prosecutors general Yuriy Lutsenko and Viktor Shokin .
Much of the documents aren ’ t in English , but Parnas also exchanges messages with the oil billionaire and Republican donor Harry Sargeant III and Joseph Ahearn , who Politico identified as an official at the pro-Trump America First Action PAC .
Parnas and his business associate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ charged with a scheme to violate campaign finance laws .
Parnas has sought to share evidence collected in his case with House impeachment investigators , and some of it has started to be released publicly .
A first document dump came Tuesday .
The records in Wednesday ’ s tranche appear in Tuesday ’ s , but there is compelling new material , as well — including Lutsenko talking with Parnas about issues at the center of the impeachment charges against President Donald Trump .
In another conversation in March , Ahearn , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parnas , “ What should I send don to tweet.
” Parnas later sent Ahearn an article and tells the PAC official , “ Have jr retweet it.
” “ Sent , ” Ahearn replied .
In a colorful exchange a few days later , Parnas sent Ahearn pictures of himself suiting up in a bulletproof vest .
“ Jesus , ” Ahearn texted back .
“ Be safe.
” “ Trust me trying , ” Parnas responded .
In another message string , Parnas spoke with Tommy Hicks Jr. , who was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Driving Rudy now , ” Parnas told Hicks .
Hicks encouraged Parnas to listen to a segment of a One America News Network show while driving .
“ Wow this is exactly what we ’ ve been saying , ” Parnas wrote .
The records also reveal a deeper connection than has been previously acknowledged between Parnas and Sargeant .
Sargeant has denied a scheme reportedly pursued by Parnas and Fruman to export American gas to Ukraine , but several times in the messages between Parnas and Sargeant , the men @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m meeting with Rudy in 15-20 min I need to know what I ’ m talking about we have people scheduled to meet on Saturday in Vienna , ” Parnas wrote to Sargeant on April 1o , after complaining that a trip had been cancelled .

House Democrats on Wednesday released a second, much larger trove of documents from Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas.
The records included text messages, photos and other communications Parnas exchanged with key players in the Ukraine scandal, including the former Ukrainian prosecutors general Yuriy Lutsenko and Viktor Shokin.
Much of the documents aren’t in English, but Parnas also exchanges messages with the oil billionaire and Republican donor Harry Sargeant III and Joseph Ahearn, who Politico identified as an official at the pro-Trump America First Action PAC.
Parnas and his business associate Igor Fruman were arrested in October and charged with a scheme to violate campaign finance laws. Parnas has sought to share evidence collected in his case with House impeachment investigators, and some of it has started to be released publicly. A first document dump came Tuesday.
The records in Wednesday’s tranche appear in Tuesday’s, but there is compelling new material, as well — including Lutsenko talking with Parnas about issues at the center of the impeachment charges against President Donald Trump.
Lutsenko to Parnas on March 8: “these are not questions for a sitting president. In the heat of the campaign he (Poroshenko) cannot answer such questions about the ambassador, Biden, etc” pic.twitter.com/pxFlj2OM0e — Josh Kovensky (@JoshKovensky) January 15, 2020
Lutsenko was upset that the State Dept initially defended Yovanovitch against false allegations peddled by @jsolomonReports. “So now not only the ambassador, but the State Dept will attack me??? Cool” he wrote to Parnas pic.twitter.com/28apjrYhjs — Josh Kovensky (@JoshKovensky) January 15, 2020
In this exchange, Lutsenko appears to ask Parnas “when will I receive an invitation from the attorney general” pic.twitter.com/QLGBddox76 — Josh Kovensky (@JoshKovensky) January 15, 2020
Here we have Lutsenko telling Parnas he has evidence of payments from Burisma to Seneca (Hunter Biden’s firm) for half a million dollars. When Parnas says he can send them, Lutsenko replies “I’ll transmit them through the new ambassador :)” pic.twitter.com/uzJoXx4xod — Josh Kovensky (@JoshKovensky) January 15, 2020
Here’s Lev Parnas and Lutsenko having a discussion about @AndriyUkraineTe pic.twitter.com/bHrEZk9HWg — Josh Kovensky (@JoshKovensky) January 15, 2020
In another conversation in March, Ahearn, the America First Action official, asked Parnas, “What should I send don to tweet.” Parnas later sent Ahearn an article and tells the PAC official, “Have jr retweet it.” “Sent,” Ahearn replied.
In a colorful exchange a few days later, Parnas sent Ahearn pictures of himself suiting up in a bulletproof vest. “Jesus,” Ahearn texted back. “Be safe.” “Trust me trying,” Parnas responded.
In another message string, Parnas spoke with Tommy Hicks Jr., the co-chair of the Republican National Committee. “Driving Rudy now,” Parnas told Hicks.
Hicks encouraged Parnas to listen to a segment of a One America News Network show while driving.
“Wow this is exactly what we’ve been saying,” Parnas wrote.
The records also reveal a deeper connection than has been previously acknowledged between Parnas and Sargeant.
Sargeant has denied a scheme reportedly pursued by Parnas and Fruman to export American gas to Ukraine, but several times in the messages between Parnas and Sargeant, the men discuss Parnas’ expenses.
“I’m meeting with Rudy in 15-20 min I need to know what I’m talking about we have people scheduled to meet on Saturday in Vienna,” Parnas wrote to Sargeant on April 1o, after complaining that a trip had been cancelled.
“Just becoming expensive flying u guys everywhere LEV” Sargeant responded.
Read the documents here.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--Northam Declares State of Emergency Ahead of MLK Day Gun Rights Rally, Citing Threats

Virginia Gov .
Ralph Northam ( D-VA ) announced Wednesday that he was declaring a state of emergency in order to prohibit weapons at an upcoming pro-gun rally .
At a press conference , Northam described the potential for violence and said he was prohibiting all weapons , not just guns .
He cited “ credible intelligence ” from law enforcement that groups including out-of-state militias and hate groups had “ malicious plans ” for Monday ’ s rally .
“ We ’ re seeing threats of violence , ” the governor said .
“ We ’ re seeing threats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Capitol.
” Northam didn ’ t go into specifics on what threats the state had seen , but he did mention the prospect of people storming the Capitol , and the possibility of groups “ weaponizing drones ” over the area .
The weapons ban , according to the written emergency declaration , applies to Richmond ’ s Capitol Square .
It begins Friday at 5 p.m. and continues until Tuesday at 5 p.m. Last week , lawmakers banned guns in the Capitol Building itself .
“ They ’ re coming to intimidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the “ violent groups and white nationalists from outside Virginia.
” Later , he expressed concern about “ another incident like the one we saw in Charlottesville , ” where a white nationalist killed an anti-fascist protester in 2017 at a chaotic rally in which racist groups fought in the streets with counter-protesters .
At Monday ’ s “ Lobby Day , ” pro-gun advocates led by the Virginia Citizens Defense League will crowd Virginia ’ s Capitol and advocate against a package of new gun control bills pushed by Democrats in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since 1993 , Democrats control the state ’ s governorship and both legislative chambers , and they ’ ve pursued gun legislation that has pro-gun activists up in arms , including a “ red flag ” law that empowers judges to confiscate firearms from people deemed an “ extreme risk , ” as well as a background check bill and other measures .
Militia groups from around the state and elsewhere in the country , as well as other gun rights groups , have rallied against the measures since Democrats won control of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some localities have declared themselves “ Second Amendment Sanctuary Cities ” and pledged not to enforce state gun restrictions .
One local sheriff even vowed to “ deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.
” Philip Van Cleave , president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League , said Wednesday that Virginia Democrats had “ declared war on law-abiding gun owners.
” “ Hell no he ’ s not going to stop [ the event ] with that little act , ” Van Cleave told USA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Northam ’ s planned weapons ban .
Chris Hill , a Georgia native and founder of the Three Percent Security Force militia , took issue with the legal grounds on which Northam issued the emergency declaration .
But he told TPM his group would “ play wait and see ” with regard to carrying weapons .
Others took the news a little worse .
“ It ’ s like these people want war , ” tweeted Jon Miller , host on the conservative BlazeTV channel , a few hours before Northam ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , bitch .
”

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D-VA) announced Wednesday that he was declaring a state of emergency in order to prohibit weapons at an upcoming pro-gun rally.
At a press conference, Northam described the potential for violence and said he was prohibiting all weapons, not just guns. He cited “credible intelligence” from law enforcement that groups including out-of-state militias and hate groups had “malicious plans” for Monday’s rally.
“We’re seeing threats of violence,” the governor said. “We’re seeing threats of armed confrontation and assault on our Capitol.”
Northam didn’t go into specifics on what threats the state had seen, but he did mention the prospect of people storming the Capitol, and the possibility of groups “weaponizing drones” over the area.
The weapons ban, according to the written emergency declaration, applies to Richmond’s Capitol Square. It begins Friday at 5 p.m. and continues until Tuesday at 5 p.m. Last week, lawmakers banned guns in the Capitol Building itself.
“They’re coming to intimidate and cause harm,” Northam said of the “violent groups and white nationalists from outside Virginia.” Later, he expressed concern about “another incident like the one we saw in Charlottesville,” where a white nationalist killed an anti-fascist protester in 2017 at a chaotic rally in which racist groups fought in the streets with counter-protesters.
At Monday’s “Lobby Day,” pro-gun advocates led by the Virginia Citizens Defense League will crowd Virginia’s Capitol and advocate against a package of new gun control bills pushed by Democrats in the state.
For the first time since 1993, Democrats control the state’s governorship and both legislative chambers, and they’ve pursued gun legislation that has pro-gun activists up in arms, including a “red flag” law that empowers judges to confiscate firearms from people deemed an “extreme risk,” as well as a background check bill and other measures.
Militia groups from around the state and elsewhere in the country, as well as other gun rights groups, have rallied against the measures since Democrats won control of the state’s government last year.
Some localities have declared themselves “Second Amendment Sanctuary Cities” and pledged not to enforce state gun restrictions. One local sheriff even vowed to “deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.”
Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, said Wednesday that Virginia Democrats had “declared war on law-abiding gun owners.”
“Hell no he’s not going to stop [the event] with that little act,” Van Cleave told USA Today, after reports first emerged of Northam’s planned weapons ban.
Chris Hill, a Georgia native and founder of the Three Percent Security Force militia, took issue with the legal grounds on which Northam issued the emergency declaration. But he told TPM his group would “play wait and see” with regard to carrying weapons.
Others took the news a little worse.
“It’s like these people want war,” tweeted Jon Miller, host on the conservative BlazeTV channel, a few hours before Northam’s press conference. “Come and take it, bitch.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--Bipartisan Call For Sexual Harassment Investigation Into Michigan Republican

The leaders in the Michigan state Senate called for an investigation Wednesday into Sen. Pete Lucido ’ s ( R ) comment to a reporter that a group of schoolboys could “ have a lot of fun ” with her .
Majority Leader Mike Shirkey ( R ) and Minority Leader Jim Ananich ( D ) addressed the letter to the Senate Business Office .
“ Sexual harassment has no place in the Michigan Senate , ” they wrote .
“ We take these allegations very seriously and trust that you will take appropriate action to resolve this matter.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a first-person account of her interactions with the state senator Wednesday .
She was waiting outside of the Senate chamber to ask Lucido about reporting that he was part of a Facebook group that was violently opposed to Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer ( D ) .
As he walked out , a group of about 30 high school boys from his alma mater stood waiting .
He told Donahue he ’ d get to her after honoring the boys .
“ You should hang around !
” he said before he walked away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of fun with these boys , or they could have a lot of fun with you.
” When Lucido circled back with her , Donahue brought up his comment and told him that she ’ d found it “ unprofessional ” and took issue with what he was “ insinuating.
” She added that he would not have made such a comment to any of her male colleagues or female colleagues older than her 22 years .
Lucido insisted that he was referring to the awkwardness boys educated at an all-male school feel @ @ @

The leaders in the Michigan state Senate called for an investigation Wednesday into Sen. Pete Lucido’s (R) comment to a reporter that a group of schoolboys could “have a lot of fun” with her.
Majority Leader Mike Shirkey (R) and Minority Leader Jim Ananich (D) addressed the letter to the Senate Business Office.
“Sexual harassment has no place in the Michigan Senate,” they wrote. “We take these allegations very seriously and trust that you will take appropriate action to resolve this matter.”
Allison Donahue of the Michigan Advance wrote a first-person account of her interactions with the state senator Wednesday.
She was waiting outside of the Senate chamber to ask Lucido about reporting that he was part of a Facebook group that was violently opposed to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D).
As he walked out, a group of about 30 high school boys from his alma mater stood waiting. He told Donahue he’d get to her after honoring the boys. “You should hang around!” he said before he walked away. “You could have a lot of fun with these boys, or they could have a lot of fun with you.”
Donahue recalled the boys erupting into laughter.
When Lucido circled back with her, Donahue brought up his comment and told him that she’d found it “unprofessional” and took issue with what he was “insinuating.” She added that he would not have made such a comment to any of her male colleagues or female colleagues older than her 22 years.
Lucido insisted that he was referring to the awkwardness boys educated at an all-male school feel around women.
Read the letter below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--New Book Claims Trump Was Itching To Meet Putin Before The Inauguration

A new book by two longtime Washington Post reporters reveals key moments in President Trump ’ s first three years in office , which include those rife with foreign policy implications .
According to a Washington Post report Wednesday , one of those moments captured in “ A Very Stable Genius , ” written by Post reporters Philip Rucker and Carol D. Leonnig , include the President being eager to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin before his inauguration .
The book reports “ that during the transition he interrupts an interview with one of his secretary of state candidates ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ When can I meet Putin ?
Can I meet with him before the inaugural ceremony ?
” Trump asked , according to the book .
The book also recalled that after Trump and Putin met in person for the first time at the Group of 20 summit in 2017 , the President began touting himself as a Russia expert and dismissed the expertise of his then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson , who previously worked with Putin while climbing up the ExxonMobil corporate ladder and doing business with Russia .
“ Tillerson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and studying his moves on the chessboard were suddenly irrelevant , ” the authors wrote , according to the Post .
“ ‘ I have had a two-hour meeting with Putin , ’ Trump told Tillerson .
‘ That ’ s all I need to know .
.
.
.
I ’ ve sized it all up .
I ’ ve got it.
’ ” “ The disdain he shows for our country ’ s foundation and its principles .
The disregard he has for right and wrong .
Your fist clenches .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , according to the book .
In an author ’ s note , the Post reporters wrote that the book is based on hundreds of hours of interviews with more than 200 sources .
Although Trump initially committed to an interview for the book , the authors wrote that he ultimately declined .

A new book by two longtime Washington Post reporters reveals key moments in President Trump’s first three years in office, which include those rife with foreign policy implications.
According to a Washington Post report Wednesday, one of those moments captured in “A Very Stable Genius,” written by Post reporters Philip Rucker and Carol D. Leonnig, include the President being eager to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin before his inauguration. The book reports “that during the transition he interrupts an interview with one of his secretary of state candidates” to ask about setting up a meeting.
“When can I meet Putin? Can I meet with him before the inaugural ceremony?” Trump asked, according to the book.
The book also recalled that after Trump and Putin met in person for the first time at the Group of 20 summit in 2017, the President began touting himself as a Russia expert and dismissed the expertise of his then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who previously worked with Putin while climbing up the ExxonMobil corporate ladder and doing business with Russia.
“Tillerson’s years of negotiating with Putin and studying his moves on the chessboard were suddenly irrelevant,” the authors wrote, according to the Post. “‘I have had a two-hour meeting with Putin,’ Trump told Tillerson. ‘That’s all I need to know. . . . I’ve sized it all up. I’ve got it.’”
One government aide told the authors that Trump “ruined that magic” that used to surround the presidency.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--The Story Behind The Tense Non-Handshake Between Warren And Sanders

Most observers of a fairly mild Democratic debate Tuesday have homed in on one exchange that came after the main action ended : Sen. Elizabeth Warren ’ s ( D-MA ) refusal to shake Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ ( I-VT ) hand as they left the stage .
Cameras caught her saying something with a serious look on her face to Sanders as he shook his head in response and pointed to himself then to her .
He then turned and walked away .
According to the New York Times , people familiar with the exchange confirmed most people ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her concern that Sanders mischaracterized a remark he made in 2018 that a woman couldn ’ t be elected president .
He denied saying it again during the debate ; Warren maintains that he did .
Per the Times , Sanders asked to continue the conversation at a different time before he moved away .
The Times reporting confirms an earlier comment from Sanders ’ campaign manager Faiz Shakir given to the Washington Post.
“ She came to raise a concern , and he said let ’ s talk about that later , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ awkwardly hovered behind the two , waiting for a handshake while they had their rushed conversation .
He told a CNN panel just after the debate that he couldn ’ t make out much of what they were saying and that he just wanted to remove himself from the uncomfortable situation .
The much-awaited exchange on Sanders ’ alleged comment during the debate was less vicious than expected , with Warren quickly changing the subject to the evident electoral success of the women on the stage ( herself and Sen. Amy Klobuchar ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the comment itself .

Most observers of a fairly mild Democratic debate Tuesday have homed in on one exchange that came after the main action ended: Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) refusal to shake Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) hand as they left the stage.
Cameras caught her saying something with a serious look on her face to Sanders as he shook his head in response and pointed to himself then to her. He then turned and walked away.
According to the New York Times, people familiar with the exchange confirmed most people’s assumptions. Warren was bringing up her concern that Sanders mischaracterized a remark he made in 2018 that a woman couldn’t be elected president. He denied saying it again during the debate; Warren maintains that he did.
Per the Times, Sanders asked to continue the conversation at a different time before he moved away.
The Times reporting confirms an earlier comment from Sanders’ campaign manager Faiz Shakir given to the Washington Post.“She came to raise a concern, and he said let’s talk about that later,” Shakir said.
Billionaire Tom Steyer awkwardly hovered behind the two, waiting for a handshake while they had their rushed conversation. He told a CNN panel just after the debate that he couldn’t make out much of what they were saying and that he just wanted to remove himself from the uncomfortable situation.
The much-awaited exchange on Sanders’ alleged comment during the debate was less vicious than expected, with Warren quickly changing the subject to the evident electoral success of the women on the stage (herself and Sen. Amy Klobuchar) rather than going back and forth on the comment itself.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--Parnas Texts Expose Ukrainian Prosecutor’s Role In Impeachment Scandal

President Donald Trump ’ s impeachment may all boil down to the crazed ambitions of one man .
But it ’ s not necessarily those of the President himself , nor those of his attorney Rudy Giuliani .
Rather , texts from Giuliani henchman Lev Parnas suggest , the demiurge manipulating the Trump administration for the past year may be Ukraine ’ s former Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko .
Congress released the WhatsApp messages in excerpted form , curated in part to show moments relevant to the House ’ s impeachment inquiry .
Because of that , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ messages are in some cases , or whether Parnas replied .
One section lists dozens of texts from Lutsenko to Parnas , in which he complains about U.S .
Ambassador Maria Yovanovitch criticizing him and his associates over allegations of corruption .
“ The ambassador openly called for the firing of the head of the Special Anti-corruption Prosecutor , ” Lutsenko wrote in one March 5 text message .
He appears to have been referring to a speech Yovanovitch gave the same day criticizing Lutsenko and Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor Nazar Kholodnytsky for failing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s removal .
But the question is less what sparked Lutsenko ’ s rage at Yovanovitch as where it took him .
The texts reveal that Lutsenko engaged in a very specific quid pro quo with Parnas : in exchange for Lutsenko making negative statements about the Bidens , Yovanovitch would be removed .
In one March 22 text from Lutsenko , for example , the Ukrainian politician tells Parnas “ it ’ s just that if you don ’ t make a decision about Madam [ Yovanovitch ] , you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statements .
Including about B.
” Lutsenko wrote that message two days after Solomon published his first interviews with Lutsenko , who had told Solomon that he would open an investigation into whether Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election by trying to hurt Trump , and that Yovanovitch had given him a do-not-prosecute list .
All the while , Parnas was in the background , playing a key role in linking Lutsenko with Solomon .
ProPublica reported in October , after Parnas ’ s indictment on campaign finance charges , that Solomon worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Lutsenko and receive information .
That story quoted a March 2019 email that Solomon wrote saying “ just got word from Lev that the prosecutor general has agreed to do an interview tomorrow , ” apparently referring to Lutsenko .
There is further evidence in the texts released by the House to suggest that Lutsenko negotiated with Parnas over what Solomon was to receive .
Some of the conditions attached to Lutsenko providing information – like Yovanovitch ’ s removal – would not have been within Parnas ’ power to fulfill .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Giuliani , who successfully lobbied for Yovanovitch ’ s ouster in April 2019 , would have had to have been involved .
Giuliani has declined to comply with House demands for relevant text messages and other communications .
The information that Lutsenko and Parnas discuss providing mirror that which appeared in articles published by Solomon .
In one March 28 exchange , for example , Parnas wrote to Lutsenko that “ I was asked to personally convey to you that America supports you and will not let you be harmed no matter how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn around and will be on the right track.
” Lutsenko replied to Parnas that he had “ a copy of payments from Burisma to Seneca , ” an apparent reference to a company Hunter Biden co-founded called Rosemont Seneca Bohai , which has featured at the center of Trumpworld narratives of Biden corruption .
Three days after the exchange , on April 1 , Solomon published an article referencing payments from Burisma to Seneca accompanied by another interview with Lutsenko .
At the same time , the messages show , Lutsenko was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his end of the apparent bargain : Yovanovitch had not yet been fired , even after Solomon began to publish Lutsenko ’ s allegations .
“ My Zlochevsky case is moving along successfully .
There ’ s evidence about transfers to B , ” Lutsenko wrote in one March 26 message to Parnas , apparently referring to Burisma CEO Mykola Zlochevsky and the Bidens .
“ And yet you can ’ t even get rid of one fool .
”

President Donald Trump’s impeachment may all boil down to the crazed ambitions of one man.
But it’s not necessarily those of the President himself, nor those of his attorney Rudy Giuliani.
Rather, texts from Giuliani henchman Lev Parnas suggest, the demiurge manipulating the Trump administration for the past year may be Ukraine’s former Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko.
Congress released the WhatsApp messages in excerpted form, curated in part to show moments relevant to the House’s impeachment inquiry. Because of that, it’s unclear what the full context of the messages are in some cases, or whether Parnas replied.
One section lists dozens of texts from Lutsenko to Parnas, in which he complains about U.S. Ambassador Maria Yovanovitch criticizing him and his associates over allegations of corruption.
“The ambassador openly called for the firing of the head of the Special Anti-corruption Prosecutor,” Lutsenko wrote in one March 5 text message. He appears to have been referring to a speech Yovanovitch gave the same day criticizing Lutsenko and Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor Nazar Kholodnytsky for failing to fight corruption and calling for Kholodnytsky’s removal.
But the question is less what sparked Lutsenko’s rage at Yovanovitch as where it took him.
The texts reveal that Lutsenko engaged in a very specific quid pro quo with Parnas: in exchange for Lutsenko making negative statements about the Bidens, Yovanovitch would be removed.
In one March 22 text from Lutsenko, for example, the Ukrainian politician tells Parnas “it’s just that if you don’t make a decision about Madam [Yovanovitch], you’re placing into doubt all of my statements. Including about B.”
It’s not confirmed that “B” stands for Biden, but Lutsenko repeatedly uses it to refer to allegations later peddled by The Hill columnist John Solomon against the Bidens.
Lutsenko wrote that message two days after Solomon published his first interviews with Lutsenko, who had told Solomon that he would open an investigation into whether Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election by trying to hurt Trump, and that Yovanovitch had given him a do-not-prosecute list.
All the while, Parnas was in the background, playing a key role in linking Lutsenko with Solomon.
ProPublica reported in October, after Parnas’s indictment on campaign finance charges, that Solomon worked with Parnas to set up the interview with Lutsenko and receive information.
That story quoted a March 2019 email that Solomon wrote saying “just got word from Lev that the prosecutor general has agreed to do an interview tomorrow,” apparently referring to Lutsenko.
There is further evidence in the texts released by the House to suggest that Lutsenko negotiated with Parnas over what Solomon was to receive.
Some of the conditions attached to Lutsenko providing information – like Yovanovitch’s removal – would not have been within Parnas’ power to fulfill. Rather, someone like Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, who successfully lobbied for Yovanovitch’s ouster in April 2019, would have had to have been involved.
Giuliani has declined to comply with House demands for relevant text messages and other communications.
The information that Lutsenko and Parnas discuss providing mirror that which appeared in articles published by Solomon.
In one March 28 exchange, for example, Parnas wrote to Lutsenko that “I was asked to personally convey to you that America supports you and will not let you be harmed no matter how it looks now, everything will soon turn around and will be on the right track.”
Lutsenko replied to Parnas that he had “a copy of payments from Burisma to Seneca,” an apparent reference to a company Hunter Biden co-founded called Rosemont Seneca Bohai, which has featured at the center of Trumpworld narratives of Biden corruption.
Three days after the exchange, on April 1, Solomon published an article referencing payments from Burisma to Seneca accompanied by another interview with Lutsenko.
At the same time, the messages show, Lutsenko was getting upset that Parnas was not fulfilling his end of the apparent bargain: Yovanovitch had not yet been fired, even after Solomon began to publish Lutsenko’s allegations.
“My Zlochevsky case is moving along successfully. There’s evidence about transfers to B,” Lutsenko wrote in one March 26 message to Parnas, apparently referring to Burisma CEO Mykola Zlochevsky and the Bidens. “And yet you can’t even get rid of one fool.”
“She’s not a simple fool,” Parnas replied.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--GOPer Tells Female Reporter High School Boys ‘Could Have A Lot Of Fun With You’

Allison Donahue , who works at the local news outlet Michigan Advance , reported on Wednesday that Lucido had made the comment the previous day outside the Senate chamber in front of approximately 30 students from De La Salle Collegiate , an all-boys high school .
“ You should hang around !
You could have a lot of fun with these boys , or they could have a lot of fun with you , ” he told her .
“ The teenagers burst into an Old Boys ’ Network-type of laughter , and I walked away knowing that I had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ room ’ talk , ” Donahue wrote in her report .
“ Except it wasn ’ t the locker room ; it was the Senate chamber .
And this isn ’ t high school .
It ’ s my career.
” She said the Republican lawmaker ’ s comments were “ belittling and it came from a place of power.
” When Donahue called him out , an unrepentant Lucido “ assured me it was nothing personal and this is just how he talks to young women , ” she wrote .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Wednesday that the incident , which he did not deny , was being “ blown out of proportion ” and that he was “ not talking about anything sexual ” when he made the comment .
Then he reversed course , offering a brief apology on Twitter .
“ I apologize for the misunderstanding yesterday and for offending Allison Donahue , ” he wrote .
It is unclear if he contacted her directly to apologize .
At the time of writing , Lucido ’ s office did not respond to TPM ’ @ @ @ @ @

Michigan state Senate Majority Whip Peter Lucido (R) made a disturbing remark to a female journalist on Tuesday.
Allison Donahue, who works at the local news outlet Michigan Advance, reported on Wednesday that Lucido had made the comment the previous day outside the Senate chamber in front of approximately 30 students from De La Salle Collegiate, an all-boys high school.
“You should hang around! You could have a lot of fun with these boys, or they could have a lot of fun with you,” he told her.
“The teenagers burst into an Old Boys’ Network-type of laughter, and I walked away knowing that I had been the punchline of their ‘locker room’ talk,” Donahue wrote in her report. “Except it wasn’t the locker room; it was the Senate chamber. And this isn’t high school. It’s my career.”
She said the Republican lawmaker’s comments were “belittling and it came from a place of power.”
When Donahue called him out, an unrepentant Lucido “assured me it was nothing personal and this is just how he talks to young women,” she wrote.
The GOP senator told the Detroit Free Press on Wednesday that the incident, which he did not deny, was being “blown out of proportion” and that he was “not talking about anything sexual” when he made the comment.
Then he reversed course, offering a brief apology on Twitter.
“I apologize for the misunderstanding yesterday and for offending Allison Donahue,” he wrote. It is unclear if he contacted her directly to apologize.
At the time of writing, Lucido’s office did not respond to TPM’s request for comment.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--WH Claims It’s ‘Extraordinarily Unlikely’ Senate Trial Goes Longer Than Two Weeks

White House officials on Wednesday played down the idea that the coming Senate impeachment trial could last longer than two weeks — an estimate that ’ s at odds with what even top Senate Republicans believe about how long the trial will last .
“ It ’ s extraordinarily unlikely that we ’ d be going on beyond two weeks , ” a senior administration official said on a phone call with reporters .
The official was asked about the prospect that President Trump would postpone his plans to give the the State of the Union on Feb. 4 if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
“ We think that this case is overwhelming for the President and the Senate is not going to have any need to be taking that amount of time on this , ” the official said .
The official requested anonymity as a ground rule for hosting the call .
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) has not released the resolution dictating the trial procedures , but he has suggested it would largely follow the model of the Clinton impeachment trial .
In that trial , the House management team and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given up to 24 hours of floor time ( spread across several days ) to present their initial case .
The Clinton resolution also provided a period for senators to a submit written questions to each side — a phase that also could last several days .
Later on in the call , the senior Trump administration official stressed not to assume anything about the length of the presentation the defense team had planned .
“ The reason it doesn ’ t take a very long time is that the facts are simple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the facts are on the President ’ s side , and the House Democrats don ’ t have any credible evidence to show any wrongdoing .
When you have an easy case , you don ’ t need a long time to present it.
” The White House has been pushing for the Senate to vote to dismiss case early on in the trial — a move that requires only 51 votes .
( There are currently 53 Republican senators ) .
However , McConnell has said there was little interest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the senators hear the arguments of both sides .
On the call Wednesday , the administration official said a vote to dismiss the case would be “ appropriate ” because it would demonstrate that “ this [ case ] is so insubstantial we shouldn ’ t spend more time on it.
” The official declined to say if or when the President ’ s legal team would bring up such a motion themselves .

White House officials on Wednesday played down the idea that the coming Senate impeachment trial could last longer than two weeks — an estimate that’s at odds with what even top Senate Republicans believe about how long the trial will last.
“It’s extraordinarily unlikely that we’d be going on beyond two weeks,” a senior administration official said on a phone call with reporters. The official was asked about the prospect that President Trump would postpone his plans to give the the State of the Union on Feb. 4 if the trial was still ongoing at that time.
“We think that this case is overwhelming for the President and the Senate is not going to have any need to be taking that amount of time on this,” the official said.
The official requested anonymity as a ground rule for hosting the call.
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has not released the resolution dictating the trial procedures, but he has suggested it would largely follow the model of the Clinton impeachment trial.
In that trial, the House management team and the President’s defense were each given up to 24 hours of floor time (spread across several days) to present their initial case. The Clinton resolution also provided a period for senators to a submit written questions to each side — a phase that also could last several days.
Later on in the call, the senior Trump administration official stressed not to assume anything about the length of the presentation the defense team had planned.
“The reason it doesn’t take a very long time is that the facts are simple,” the official said, “and the facts are on the President’s side, and the House Democrats don’t have any credible evidence to show any wrongdoing. When you have an easy case, you don’t need a long time to present it.”
The White House has been pushing for the Senate to vote to dismiss case early on in the trial — a move that requires only 51 votes. (There are currently 53 Republican senators).
However, McConnell has said there was little interest in his caucus to dismiss the case before the senators hear the arguments of both sides.
On the call Wednesday, the administration official said a vote to dismiss the case would be “appropriate” because it would demonstrate that “this [case] is so insubstantial we shouldn’t spend more time on it.”
The official declined to say if or when the President’s legal team would bring up such a motion themselves.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--House Staff ‘Furious’ After State Dept. Abruptly Cancels Security Briefing

Questions surrounding the specific intelligence regarding the Trump administration ’ s claim that there was an “ imminent ” threat to four U.S. embassies aren ’ t any closer to being answered after the State Department reportedly canceled a classified congressional briefing scheduled for Wednesday morning .
Within the past week , Trump administration officials have provided either shifting or vague explanations of the “ imminent ” threat that President Trump has used as justification for his authorization of the strike that killed top Iranian military official Qasem Soleimani earlier this month .
On Sunday , neither Defense Secretary Mark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ Brien could confirm that Trump had specific intelligence that Soleimani threatened to target four U.S. embassies during their multiple cable news appearances .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has only continued to waffle on the “ imminent ” Iran threat talking point by expressing his uncertainty of who first described the threat as “ imminent ” as recently as Monday .
According to a Politico report Wednesday morning , a House aide said that the State Department canceled the briefing focused on embassy security Tuesday without warning and that Capitol Hill staffers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imminent ” threat are now “ furious.
” “ Staff are furious , ” the House aide told Politico .
“ This briefing is required by law every month , and today ’ s was the most important we ’ ve had scheduled in a long time .
The State Department has given us no explanation whatsoever.
” Politico reported that although the canceled briefing was initially scheduled to focus on the situation in the African country of Burundi , congressional staff requested that the briefing ’ s agenda also cover embassy security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
According to Politico , congressional staffers wanted clarification on the Trump administration ’ s shifting explanations of the “ imminent threat ” and wanted to request a global threat assessment for U.S. personnel .
The briefing ’ s cancellation comes on the heels of the House Democrats ’ release of documents suggesting that associates of Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani placed former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch — who Pompeo recalled in May — under surveillance .
It ’ s not clear how successful that effort really was .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dept .
for comment .
We will update this post if we hear back .

Questions surrounding the specific intelligence regarding the Trump administration’s claim that there was an “imminent” threat to four U.S. embassies aren’t any closer to being answered after the State Department reportedly canceled a classified congressional briefing scheduled for Wednesday morning.
Within the past week, Trump administration officials have provided either shifting or vague explanations of the “imminent” threat that President Trump has used as justification for his authorization of the strike that killed top Iranian military official Qasem Soleimani earlier this month.
On Sunday, neither Defense Secretary Mark Esper nor National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien could confirm that Trump had specific intelligence that Soleimani threatened to target four U.S. embassies during their multiple cable news appearances. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has only continued to waffle on the “imminent” Iran threat talking point by expressing his uncertainty of who first described the threat as “imminent” as recently as Monday.
According to a Politico report Wednesday morning, a House aide said that the State Department canceled the briefing focused on embassy security Tuesday without warning and that Capitol Hill staffers who planned to inquire about the “imminent” threat are now “furious.”
“Staff are furious,” the House aide told Politico. “This briefing is required by law every month, and today’s was the most important we’ve had scheduled in a long time. The State Department has given us no explanation whatsoever.”
Politico reported that although the canceled briefing was initially scheduled to focus on the situation in the African country of Burundi, congressional staff requested that the briefing’s agenda also cover embassy security in light of the Trump-authorized Soleimani strike.
According to Politico, congressional staffers wanted clarification on the Trump administration’s shifting explanations of the “imminent threat” and wanted to request a global threat assessment for U.S. personnel.
The briefing’s cancellation comes on the heels of the House Democrats’ release of documents suggesting that associates of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani placed former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch — who Pompeo recalled in May — under surveillance. It’s not clear how successful that effort really was.
TPM has reached out to the State Dept. for comment. We will update this post if we hear back.
Read Politico’s report here.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-15--Dishwashers Are Trump’s Enemies Now, Apparently

Add dishwashers to President Donald Trump ’ s weirdly long list of household staples he has beef with .
During a campaign rally in Milwaukee , Wisconsin on Tuesday night , Trump mentioned he was “ approving new dishwashers that give you more water.
” “ Anyone have a new dishwasher ?
” Trump asked the crowd .
“ I ’ m sorry for that .
I ’ m sorry for that , it ’ s worthless.
” “ They give you so little water , ” he continued .
“ You ever see it ?
Air comes out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ brag about how he was “ putting the water back ” and promised that “ you ’ re going to have just as much as you ’ ve ever had.
” “ Your dishes are gon na be beautiful , ” he said .
“ I ’ m sorry that you just bought one of those brand-new pieces of garbage.
” He also complained about toilets , lightbubls , and showers , which he had previously bashed out of nowhere in December during a meeting about the fatal shooting at a Naval base @ @ @ @ @

Add dishwashers to President Donald Trump’s weirdly long list of household staples he has beef with.
During a campaign rally in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on Tuesday night, Trump mentioned he was “approving new dishwashers that give you more water.”
“Anyone have a new dishwasher?” Trump asked the crowd. “I’m sorry for that. I’m sorry for that, it’s worthless.”
“They give you so little water,” he continued. “You ever see it? Air comes out. So little water.”
Trump proceeded to brag about how he was “putting the water back” and promised that “you’re going to have just as much as you’ve ever had.”
“Your dishes are gonna be beautiful,” he said. “I’m sorry that you just bought one of those brand-new pieces of garbage.”
He also complained about toilets, lightbubls, and showers, which he had previously bashed out of nowhere in December during a meeting about the fatal shooting at a Naval base in Pensacola, Florida.
Watch Trump below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-16--The Biggest Reveals From Lev Parnas’ Blockbuster Rachel Maddow Interview

Rudy Giuliani buddy Lev Parnas appeared on Rachel Maddow on Wednesday , dishing about previously unknown aspects of the pressure campaign on Ukraine that ’ s led to the third impeachment in American history .
Speaking alongside his attorney Joe Bondy , Parnas revealed that “ all aid ” from the United States to the Ukraine was subject to withholding by President Trump as part of the pressure campaign .
Below are the biggest bombshells culled from Parnas ’ s interview on the network .
Parnas said that Trump knew “ everything ” that was going on .
In explicit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ knew exactly who we were , ” referring to himself and his associate Igor Fruman .
“ He knew exactly who I was especially because I interacted with him at a lot of events , ” Parnas said .
Trump has denied knowing Parnas and Fruman since their October indictment on federal campaign finance charges , despite multiple photos showing them together .
“ I was with Rudy when he would speak to the president — plenty of times , ” Parnas added , saying that the President and his personal attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Was Pence part of the pressure campaign ?
Parnas told Maddow that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky ’ s May 2019 inauguration was , in effect , an object of the pressure campaign .
The presence and level of U.S. officials at the event was allegedly held out as an indicator of whether the Ukrainian government was complying with Trump ’ s demands .
That included Vice President Mike Pence ’ s lack of attendance , which Parnas claimed occurred because Ukraine had not announced “ investigations ” into Biden and alleged interference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Do you know if Vice President Pence was aware that that was the quid pro quo ?
That that was the trade , and that that it fact is why his inaugural visit was called off ?
” Maddow asked .
Parnas replied : “ I ’ m going to use a famous quote by Mr. Sutherland [ sic ] : ‘ everybody was in the loop ’ .
” Parnas also said that Trump did not only withhold military aid from Ukraine in exchange for the investigations .
Rather , Parnas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to the country , which continues to wage a defensive war on its own territory against Russian-backed proxies .
“ It wasn ’ t just military aid , it was all aid , ” Parnas said .
Perhaps the most explosive element of the interview came at the very end .
It has to do with Parnas ’ dealing with Dmytro Firtash , a Ukrainian gas billionaire who has been stranded in Vienna for years as he fights extradition to the U.S. on foreign bribery charges .
Parnas told Maddow that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whereby the oligarch would provide the Trump team with information and , in exchange , the DOJ would drop the charges against the Ukrainian mogul .
“ We had to promise Firtash something , ” Parnas said .
“ It was basically telling him we knew his case is worthless here and that he ’ s being prosecuted for no reason and basically it could get taken care of.
” Federal prosecutors have described Firtash as an “ upper-echelon ” member of Russian organized crime .
“ It was all connected , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the day , the agenda was to make sure that the Ukrainians announced the Biden investigation.
” He went on to say that Attorney General Bill Barr was “ in the loop.
” “ Mr .
Barr had to have known everything , ” Parnas added .
“ Attorney General Barr was basically on the team .
”

Rudy Giuliani buddy Lev Parnas appeared on Rachel Maddow on Wednesday, dishing about previously unknown aspects of the pressure campaign on Ukraine that’s led to the third impeachment in American history.
Speaking alongside his attorney Joe Bondy, Parnas revealed that “all aid” from the United States to the Ukraine was subject to withholding by President Trump as part of the pressure campaign.
Below are the biggest bombshells culled from Parnas’s interview on the network.
Trump knew everything
Parnas said that Trump knew “everything” that was going on.
In explicit terms, Parnas told Maddow that Trump “knew exactly who we were,” referring to himself and his associate Igor Fruman.
“He knew exactly who I was especially because I interacted with him at a lot of events,” Parnas said. Trump has denied knowing Parnas and Fruman since their October indictment on federal campaign finance charges, despite multiple photos showing them together.
“I was with Rudy when he would speak to the president — plenty of times,” Parnas added, saying that the President and his personal attorney were aware of his every “movement.”
Was Pence part of the pressure campaign?
Parnas told Maddow that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s May 2019 inauguration was, in effect, an object of the pressure campaign. The presence and level of U.S. officials at the event was allegedly held out as an indicator of whether the Ukrainian government was complying with Trump’s demands.
That included Vice President Mike Pence’s lack of attendance, which Parnas claimed occurred because Ukraine had not announced “investigations” into Biden and alleged interference against Trump during the 2016 election.
“Do you know if Vice President Pence was aware that that was the quid pro quo? That that was the trade, and that that it fact is why his inaugural visit was called off?” Maddow asked.
Parnas replied: “I’m going to use a famous quote by Mr. Sutherland [sic]: ‘everybody was in the loop’.”
‘All aid’
Parnas also said that Trump did not only withhold military aid from Ukraine in exchange for the investigations.
“It was a heated conversation.” Parnas describes the shakedown. Announce the investigation or you get nothing. pic.twitter.com/8IMjbrYbGk — Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) January 16, 2020
Rather, Parnas said, it was “all aid” to the country, which continues to wage a defensive war on its own territory against Russian-backed proxies.
“It wasn’t just military aid, it was all aid,” Parnas said.
Firtash
Perhaps the most explosive element of the interview came at the very end. It has to do with Parnas’ dealing with Dmytro Firtash, a Ukrainian gas billionaire who has been stranded in Vienna for years as he fights extradition to the U.S. on foreign bribery charges.
Parnas told Maddow that he and Giuliani struck a deal with Firtash whereby the oligarch would provide the Trump team with information and, in exchange, the DOJ would drop the charges against the Ukrainian mogul.
“We had to promise Firtash something,” Parnas said. “It was basically telling him we knew his case is worthless here and that he’s being prosecuted for no reason and basically it could get taken care of.”
Federal prosecutors have described Firtash as an “upper-echelon” member of Russian organized crime.
“It was all connected,” Parnas said. “At the end of the day, the agenda was to make sure that the Ukrainians announced the Biden investigation.”
He went on to say that Attorney General Bill Barr was “in the loop.”
“Mr. Barr had to have known everything,” Parnas added. “Attorney General Barr was basically on the team.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Parnas Ties Ukraine Pressure Campaign To Trump’s Legal Team

Lev Parnas further tied President Trump ’ s legal team to his actions in the Ukraine pressure campaign , saying that attorneys for Trump in addition to Rudy Giuliani were “ in the loop.
” The former Giuliani buddy said Trump attorney Jay Sekulow was deeply involved in several aspects of the pressure campaign .
Parnas said that Sekulow , for example , held discussions about allowing former Ukrainian general prosecutor Viktor Shokin to get a visa to visit the U.S. Shokin is both the source of and at the center of right-wing conspiracy theories damaging to Joe Biden .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ team in his impeachment trial in the Senate , along with White House counsel Pat Cipollone .
Nineties classics Ken Starr and Robert Ray will also feature , along with self-described Clinton voter-turned-pro-Trump pundit Alan Dershowitz .
Parnas ’ comments to MSNBC host Rachel Maddow suggested that Sekulow will arrive at the impeachment trial with intimate , first-hand knowledge of the allegations against the President .
“ Everybody was in the loop .
Everybody didn ’ t agree with the loop , ” Parnas said .
“ Jay Sekulow didn ’ t agree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he knew what he was doing.
” Parnas added that Sekulow “ didn ’ t want to be involved in the Ukraine stuff.
” The visa for Shokin , Parnas alleged , would have allowed him to come to the U.S. so that Giuliani could “ debrief him in front of [ Sen. ] Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) and certain other people like the attorney general.
” That bit of political theatre also never came to pass , but another did : the impeachment inquiry .
Parnas told Maddow that after receiving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President , Giuliani introduced him to John Dowd , an attorney who represented Trump for a time during the Mueller investigation .
“ It was like a movie to us , ” Parnas said , before adding that Dowd initially declined to represent him because his continuing work for President Trump may have constituted a “ conflict.
” Dowd purportedly told Parnas that he did not think Trump would waive the conflict .
“ [ Dowd ] didn ’ t think I had any relationship with the president , ” Parnas recalled .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , ‘ I think he will . '
” The same day , Parnas said , Sekulow signed a letter waiving the conflict , thereby allowing Dowd to represent him .

Lev Parnas further tied President Trump’s legal team to his actions in the Ukraine pressure campaign, saying that attorneys for Trump in addition to Rudy Giuliani were “in the loop.”
The former Giuliani buddy said Trump attorney Jay Sekulow was deeply involved in several aspects of the pressure campaign.
Parnas said that Sekulow, for example, held discussions about allowing former Ukrainian general prosecutor Viktor Shokin to get a visa to visit the U.S. Shokin is both the source of and at the center of right-wing conspiracy theories damaging to Joe Biden.
Shokin never received the visa.
Sekulow will lead Trump’s defense team in his impeachment trial in the Senate, along with White House counsel Pat Cipollone. Nineties classics Ken Starr and Robert Ray will also feature, along with self-described Clinton voter-turned-pro-Trump pundit Alan Dershowitz.
Parnas’ comments to MSNBC host Rachel Maddow suggested that Sekulow will arrive at the impeachment trial with intimate, first-hand knowledge of the allegations against the President.
“Everybody was in the loop. Everybody didn’t agree with the loop,” Parnas said. “Jay Sekulow didn’t agree with what Rudy was doing, but he knew what he was doing.”
Parnas added that Sekulow “didn’t want to be involved in the Ukraine stuff.”
The visa for Shokin, Parnas alleged, would have allowed him to come to the U.S. so that Giuliani could “debrief him in front of [Sen.] Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and certain other people like the attorney general.”
That bit of political theatre also never came to pass, but another did: the impeachment inquiry. Parnas told Maddow that after receiving a subpoena from House committees investigating the President, Giuliani introduced him to John Dowd, an attorney who represented Trump for a time during the Mueller investigation.
“It was like a movie to us,” Parnas said, before adding that Dowd initially declined to represent him because his continuing work for President Trump may have constituted a “conflict.”
Dowd purportedly told Parnas that he did not think Trump would waive the conflict.
“[Dowd] didn’t think I had any relationship with the president,” Parnas recalled. “I responded to him and I said, ‘I think he will.'”
The same day, Parnas said, Sekulow signed a letter waiving the conflict, thereby allowing Dowd to represent him.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Pompeo Denies Knowing Parnas Or Anything About Yovanovitch Surveillance

In a Friday interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo finally addressed the alleged surveillance of former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch , saying that he ’ d “ never heard about this at all.
” “ Until this story broke , the best of my recollection , I ’ d never heard of this at all , ” Pompeo told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt .
Pompeo also washed his hands of any association with Lev Parnas , the associate of President Donald Trump ’ s lawyer Rudy Giuliani , who provided a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exchanges about getting rid of and tracking Yovanovitch .
According to the Hill , the State Department agreed Thursday to brief senators about what officials knew of attempts to track Yovanovitch after heavy pressure from the Democrats .
At that point , Pompeo still had not publicly acknowledged the threats .
Pompeo had already come under fire for his refusal to put out a statement backing up Yovanovitch during Giuliani ’ s smear campaign .
In Friday ’ s interview , Pompeo still did not come to Yovanovitch ’ s defense , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alleged tracking of a U.S. diplomat .
Other foreign policy experts , including a current State Department official , have raised the alarm about the egregious treatment of an American official .
“ Not just insane , but deeply chilling , ” the State Department employee characterized the revelations to Foreign Policy magazine .
The new evidence also raises more questions about what Pompeo knew at the time .
Per the New York Times , State Department records show that Pompeo spoke to Giuliani at least twice in late March .
Giuliani said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pompeo the results of his Ukraine research .
This was around the same time Pompeo was facing pressure from both Giuliani and the White House to fire Yovanovitch .
She was recalled to Washington a month later .
Pompeo is scheduled to give a televised briefing Friday morning , though the State Department already abruptly cancelled two unrelated briefings just after Parnas ’ messages were released to the public .
Messages Parnas gave to the House Intelligence Committee were released earlier this week and revealed a Connecticut contractor named Robert Hyde telling Parnas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tracked .
It has been long known that Giuliani was working to oust Yovanovitch to clear the way for someone who would be more amenable to forcing Ukraine to concoct a phony investigation into Joe Biden and his son .
“ She under heavy protection outside Kyiv , ” Hyde sent to Parnas in March .
“ They are moving her tomorrow , ” he added days later .
“ They are willing to help if we/you would like a price , ” he texted Parnas later that day , March 25 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ukraine with the money… what I was told.
” Both men have claimed that the exchange was not a serious one .
“ I don ’ t believe it ’ s true , ” Parnas said to MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow Wednesday about Hyde ’ s surveillance talk .
“ I think he was either drunk or he was trying to make himself bigger than he was .
So I didn ’ t take it seriously.
” “ It was just colorful , we were playing , ” Hyde told Eric Bolling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I thought we were playing .
I didn ’ t know he was so serious.
” Ukraine has also opened an investigation into the threats , citing the messages which “ contain a possible violation of the law of Ukraine and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations , which protects the rights of a diplomat on the territory of the foreign country .
”

In a Friday interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo finally addressed the alleged surveillance of former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, saying that he’d “never heard about this at all.”
“Until this story broke, the best of my recollection, I’d never heard of this at all,” Pompeo told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt.
Pompeo also washed his hands of any association with Lev Parnas, the associate of President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who provided a tranche of messages to Congress that included exchanges about getting rid of and tracking Yovanovitch.
“Never met him,” Pompeo said.
According to the Hill, the State Department agreed Thursday to brief senators about what officials knew of attempts to track Yovanovitch after heavy pressure from the Democrats. At that point, Pompeo still had not publicly acknowledged the threats.
Pompeo had already come under fire for his refusal to put out a statement backing up Yovanovitch during Giuliani’s smear campaign. In Friday’s interview, Pompeo still did not come to Yovanovitch’s defense, or raise any objections or concerns about the alleged tracking of a U.S. diplomat.
Other foreign policy experts, including a current State Department official, have raised the alarm about the egregious treatment of an American official. “Not just insane, but deeply chilling,” the State Department employee characterized the revelations to Foreign Policy magazine.
The new evidence also raises more questions about what Pompeo knew at the time.
Per the New York Times, State Department records show that Pompeo spoke to Giuliani at least twice in late March. Giuliani said that during the calls, he gave Pompeo the results of his Ukraine research. This was around the same time Pompeo was facing pressure from both Giuliani and the White House to fire Yovanovitch. She was recalled to Washington a month later.
Pompeo is scheduled to give a televised briefing Friday morning, though the State Department already abruptly cancelled two unrelated briefings just after Parnas’ messages were released to the public.
Messages Parnas gave to the House Intelligence Committee were released earlier this week and revealed a Connecticut contractor named Robert Hyde telling Parnas that Yovanovitch’s movements were being tracked. It has been long known that Giuliani was working to oust Yovanovitch to clear the way for someone who would be more amenable to forcing Ukraine to concoct a phony investigation into Joe Biden and his son.
“She under heavy protection outside Kyiv,” Hyde sent to Parnas in March. “They are moving her tomorrow,” he added days later.
“They are willing to help if we/you would like a price,” he texted Parnas later that day, March 25. “Guess you can do anything in Ukraine with the money… what I was told.”
“Lol,” Parnas said in response.
Both men have claimed that the exchange was not a serious one.
“I don’t believe it’s true,” Parnas said to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Wednesday about Hyde’s surveillance talk. “I think he was either drunk or he was trying to make himself bigger than he was. So I didn’t take it seriously.”
“It was just colorful, we were playing,” Hyde told Eric Bolling on Sinclair TV the same day. “I thought we were playing. I didn’t know he was so serious.”
Still, FBI agents visited Hyde’s home and business Thursday.
Ukraine has also opened an investigation into the threats, citing the messages which “contain a possible violation of the law of Ukraine and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which protects the rights of a diplomat on the territory of the foreign country.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Dershowitz, Starr Expected To Defend Trump In Impeachment Trial

A retro crew including Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr will reportedly represent President Donald Trump at the Senate ’ s impeachment trial .
According to several reports about the team Friday morning , White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump ’ s personal lawyer Jay Sekulow will lead the team of lawyers defending Trump in the Senate .
They ’ ll be joined by Dershowitz and Starr , as well as Robert Ray .
The list notably excludes the man at the center of the Ukraine pressure campaign , Trump ’ s lawyer Rudy Giuliani .
The White House didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s request to confirm the news .
In the 90s , Ray and Starr ran the Office of the Independent Counsel , which investigated then-President Bill Clinton on everything from Whitewater to Monica Lewinsky .
She commented on the staffing move Friday .
A spokesperson for the legal team told The New York Times ’ Maggie Haberman that Dershowitz , famous for representing OJ Simpson and , more recently , for his ties to the alleged human trafficker Jeffrey Epstein , “ will present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

A retro crew including Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr will reportedly represent President Donald Trump at the Senate’s impeachment trial.
According to several reports about the team Friday morning, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump’s personal lawyer Jay Sekulow will lead the team of lawyers defending Trump in the Senate.
They’ll be joined by Dershowitz and Starr, as well as Robert Ray. The list notably excludes the man at the center of the Ukraine pressure campaign, Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani.
The White House didn’t immediately respond to TPM’s request to confirm the news.
In the 90s, Ray and Starr ran the Office of the Independent Counsel, which investigated then-President Bill Clinton on everything from Whitewater to Monica Lewinsky. She commented on the staffing move Friday.
this is definitely an “are you fucking kidding me?” kinda day. — Monica Lewinsky (@MonicaLewinsky) January 17, 2020
A spokesperson for the legal team told The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman that Dershowitz, famous for representing OJ Simpson and, more recently, for his ties to the alleged human trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, “will present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Parnas: Trump Allies ‘Tried To Keep Me Quiet,’ Pushed Me To Sacrifice Myself For POTUS

Indicted Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas charged on Thursday night that his now-former lawyers , who are close to President Donald Trump , tried to get him to throw himself under the bus to protect the President .
Parnas told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow that he fired John Dowd , who previously served as Trump ’ s lawyer , and Kevin Downing , Paul Manafort ’ s ex-lawyer , after they visited him in jail and “ started talking to me like a drill sergeant and giving me orders ” instead of trying to help him with his criminal indictment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they telling you to sacrifice yourself in order to protect the President ?
” asked Maddow .
“ That ’ s what I felt , ” he said .
The MSNBC host followed up with : “ Is the implication of this story of the lawyers that you feel that people loyal to the President and close to the President were trying to influence your defense and your case in a way that was against your interests but in the President ’ s interests ?
” “ Absolutely , ” Parnas responded .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ me quiet.
” Parnas also told Maddow that Giuliani was furious when Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky announced an investigation into corruption without mentioning Joe Biden .
“ Giuliani blew his lid on that , saying , ‘ That ’ s not what we discussed , ’ that it wasn ’ t supposed to be a corruption investigation announcement , it has to be about Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and Burisma , ” he said .

Indicted Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas charged on Thursday night that his now-former lawyers, who are close to President Donald Trump, tried to get him to throw himself under the bus to protect the President.
Parnas told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow that he fired John Dowd, who previously served as Trump’s lawyer, and Kevin Downing, Paul Manafort’s ex-lawyer, after they visited him in jail and “started talking to me like a drill sergeant and giving me orders” instead of trying to help him with his criminal indictment for campaign finance violations.
“Were they telling you to sacrifice yourself in order to protect the President?” asked Maddow.
“That’s what I felt,” he said.
The MSNBC host followed up with: “Is the implication of this story of the lawyers that you feel that people loyal to the President and close to the President were trying to influence your defense and your case in a way that was against your interests but in the President’s interests?”
“Absolutely,” Parnas responded. “I think they tried to keep me quiet.”
Lev Parnas says he felt he was asked to sacrifice himself for Trump after he was indicted: "I think they tried to keep me quiet." pic.twitter.com/SD7sHGPSUb — Talking Points Memo (@TPM) January 17, 2020
Parnas also told Maddow that Giuliani was furious when Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky announced an investigation into corruption without mentioning Joe Biden.
“Giuliani blew his lid on that, saying, ‘That’s not what we discussed,’ that it wasn’t supposed to be a corruption investigation announcement, it has to be about Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and Burisma,” he said.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-17--Lev Parnas Says Many GOPers Are Too ‘Scared’ Of Trump Getting DOJ To Investigate Them To Speak Out

In a pre-taped CNN interview that aired Thursday night , Lev Parnas , an indicted associate to Rudy Giuliani , alleged that many Republicans won ’ t speak out against President Donald Trump for fear that he ’ ll have the Justice Department and Attorney General Bill Barr investigate them .
During the second part of the pre-taped interview , Parnas told CNN anchor Anderson Cooper that while “ loyalty goes so far , ” there are “ a lot of people in the Republican party ” who “ don ’ t agree with what [ Trump ’ s ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scared , ” he said .
“ He gets away with everything , and especially with Attorney Bill Barr on his side , the Justice Department…I mean , a lot of people are scared .
They don ’ t want to get investigated.
” “ People are scared of being investigated by the Justice Department on behalf of President Trump , you ’ re saying ?
” Cooper asked .
The CNN anchor asked if that scared him .
“ It scares me a lot , ” the Giuliani associate said .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign finance law violations , Parnas came forward to the House Intelligence Committee with documents to inform them about how he helped Giuliani get ex-Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch fired as part of the pressure campaign against Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky .
Parnas has also recently appeared on MSNBC to reveal that Trump knew exactly what he was up to in Ukraine , directly implicating the President in the Ukraine scheme .
Throughout the impeachment proceedings , which began as a result of the scandal , most Republicans have stood by Trump and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military aid to Ukraine after pushing Zelensky to announce an investigation into Joe Biden .

In a pre-taped CNN interview that aired Thursday night, Lev Parnas, an indicted associate to Rudy Giuliani, alleged that many Republicans won’t speak out against President Donald Trump for fear that he’ll have the Justice Department and Attorney General Bill Barr investigate them.
During the second part of the pre-taped interview, Parnas told CNN anchor Anderson Cooper that while “loyalty goes so far,” there are “a lot of people in the Republican party” who “don’t agree with what [Trump’s] doing.”
“But they’re scared,” he said. “He gets away with everything, and especially with Attorney Bill Barr on his side, the Justice Department…I mean, a lot of people are scared. They don’t want to get investigated.”
“People are scared of being investigated by the Justice Department on behalf of President Trump, you’re saying?” Cooper asked.
“I think so,” Parnas replied.
The CNN anchor asked if that scared him.
“It scares me a lot,” the Giuliani associate said.
After he was indicted in the fall on campaign finance law violations, Parnas came forward to the House Intelligence Committee with documents to inform them about how he helped Giuliani get ex-Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch fired as part of the pressure campaign against Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky.
Parnas has also recently appeared on MSNBC to reveal that Trump knew exactly what he was up to in Ukraine, directly implicating the President in the Ukraine scheme.
Throughout the impeachment proceedings, which began as a result of the scandal, most Republicans have stood by Trump and defended his decision to freeze congressionally approved military aid to Ukraine after pushing Zelensky to announce an investigation into Joe Biden.
Watch Parnas below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-16--Biden Says He’s Open To Considering O’Rourke Or Castro As His Running Mate

Former Vice President Joe Biden isn ’ t opposed to the idea of bringing on a former 2020 Democratic rival as his potential running mate .
According to an interview with The Dallas Morning News Wednesday night , Biden said that he would consider former presidential candidates Beto O ’ Rourke and Julian Castro as his running mate or to have a position in his Cabinet if he wins the presidency .
Biden told The Dallas Morning News that he has spoken with both O ’ Rourke and Castro since they withdrew their presidential campaigns and that his “ plea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay engaged ” and that “ they are talented , talented people.
” O ’ Rourke and Castro aren ’ t the only names that Biden has floated as a potential running mate .
On Tuesday , Biden told The Sacramento Bee that he would consider Sen. Kamala Harris ( D-CA ) for “ anything she would be interested in , ” which includes vice president .
Last month , Biden bafflingly told attendees at a town hall event in New Hampshire that he would consider choosing a Republican as a running mate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in mind at the time .
Read Biden ’ s interview in The Dallas Morning News here .

Former Vice President Joe Biden isn’t opposed to the idea of bringing on a former 2020 Democratic rival as his potential running mate.
According to an interview with The Dallas Morning News Wednesday night, Biden said that he would consider former presidential candidates Beto O’Rourke and Julian Castro as his running mate or to have a position in his Cabinet if he wins the presidency.
Biden told The Dallas Morning News that he has spoken with both O’Rourke and Castro since they withdrew their presidential campaigns and that his “plea to both of them is that they stay engaged” and that “they are talented, talented people.”
O’Rourke and Castro aren’t the only names that Biden has floated as a potential running mate.
On Tuesday, Biden told The Sacramento Bee that he would consider Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) for “anything she would be interested in,” which includes vice president.
Last month, Biden bafflingly told attendees at a town hall event in New Hampshire that he would consider choosing a Republican as a running mate, despite not having a specific person in mind at the time.
Read Biden’s interview in The Dallas Morning News here.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-16--Florida Supreme Court Sides With DeSantis Over Felons Vote

The Florida Supreme Court ruled Thursday it is fair that convicted felons in Florida must pay off all fines and fees associated with their sentencing before having their right to vote restored , siding with Gov .
Ron DeSantis ( R ) and the Republican legislature .
“ The Governor asks whether the phrase “ all terms of sentence ” encompasses legal financial obligations ( LFOs ) —fines , restitution , costs , and fees—ordered by the sentencing court , ” the very conservative court wrote .
“ We answer in the affirmative , concluding that ‘ all terms of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but also all LFOs imposed in conjunction with an adjudication of guilt.
” This legal advice relates to Amendment 4 , a ballot measure passed overwhelmingly in Florida in 2018 .
The amendment allows felons — excepting those convicted on murder or felony sex crimes charges — to get back the right to vote after they ’ ve served their time and paid restitution and court costs .
Republicans wasted little time before they tacked on legislative fine print , passing a state law expanding which fees felons must pay before they get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ includes purposefully broad language to encompass as many fees and fines as possible , an obstacle to the former felons stacked on top of Florida ’ s already unusually high court fees .
DeSantis signed the law in June 2019 .
He then asked the state Supreme Court to advise on whether the former inmates would be required to pay off all legal costs incurred during their sentencing .
They have now answered in the affirmative .
DeSantis took to Twitter to celebrate the win : Critics of the Republicans ’ moves have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll tax ” and raised concerns that millions of the newly eligible voters will languish in disenfranchisement , lacking the money to pay off the financial obligations .
“ The Florida Supreme Court ’ s decision is disappointing and cuts the 1.4 million people who voters expressly intended to re-enfranchise almost in half , ” said Nancy Abudu , deputy legal director for the Southern Poverty Law Center , in a statement .
“ By holding Floridians ’ right to vote hostage , the Florida Supreme Court is permitting the unconstitutional modern-day poll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an amendment nearly 65 percent of Florida voters approved of in 2018 .
”

The Florida Supreme Court ruled Thursday it is fair that convicted felons in Florida must pay off all fines and fees associated with their sentencing before having their right to vote restored, siding with Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and the Republican legislature.
“The Governor asks whether the phrase “all terms of sentence” encompasses legal financial obligations (LFOs)—fines, restitution, costs, and fees—ordered by the sentencing court,” the very conservative court wrote. “We answer in the affirmative, concluding that ‘all terms of sentence’ encompasses not just durational periods but also all LFOs imposed in conjunction with an adjudication of guilt.”
This legal advice relates to Amendment 4, a ballot measure passed overwhelmingly in Florida in 2018. The amendment allows felons — excepting those convicted on murder or felony sex crimes charges — to get back the right to vote after they’ve served their time and paid restitution and court costs.
Republicans wasted little time before they tacked on legislative fine print, passing a state law expanding which fees felons must pay before they get their voting rights restored. The law includes purposefully broad language to encompass as many fees and fines as possible, an obstacle to the former felons stacked on top of Florida’s already unusually high court fees.
DeSantis signed the law in June 2019. He then asked the state Supreme Court to advise on whether the former inmates would be required to pay off all legal costs incurred during their sentencing. They have now answered in the affirmative.
DeSantis took to Twitter to celebrate the win:
I am pleased that @FLCourts confirms that Amendment 4 requires fines, fees & restitution be paid to victims before their voting rights may be restored. Voting is a privilege that should not be taken lightly, and I am obligated to faithfully implement Amendment 4 as it is defined. — Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) January 16, 2020
Critics of the Republicans’ moves have likened the payment requirements to a “poll tax” and raised concerns that millions of the newly eligible voters will languish in disenfranchisement, lacking the money to pay off the financial obligations.
“The Florida Supreme Court’s decision is disappointing and cuts the 1.4 million people who voters expressly intended to re-enfranchise almost in half,” said Nancy Abudu, deputy legal director for the Southern Poverty Law Center, in a statement. “By holding Floridians’ right to vote hostage, the Florida Supreme Court is permitting the unconstitutional modern-day poll tax in SB 7066, and redefining an amendment nearly 65 percent of Florida voters approved of in 2018.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-16--Feds Reportedly Target Comey In Previously Unreported Leak Probe

One of President Trump ’ s favorite targets is in the DOJ ’ s crosshairs .
Federal prosecutors in Washington , D.C. , are probing whether former FBI Director James Comey leaked classified information about a Russian intelligence document to reporters , The New York Times reported Thursday citing unnamed people familiar with the investigation .
Specifically , the Times reported , investigators are looking into at least two news articles about the document , which played a central role in Comey ’ s unusual 2016 decision to announce that Hillary Clinton would not face criminal charges for using a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The document has been described in various reports as a Russian intelligence analysis of a purported email sent from Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz ( D-FL ) , who was then the chair of the Democratic National Committee , to an official at George Soros ’ organization , Open Societies Foundations .
Some officials have suggested the document is purposeful Russian misinformation , the Times said .
The Russian analysis of the email reportedly stated that Wasserman-Schultz told the Soros official , Leonard Benardo , that then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch would make sure the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ server wouldn ’ t conclude with charges against Clinton .
Wasserman-Schuiltz and Bernardo , the Times noted , both deny being in contact with each other .
Comey reportedly used the intercepted Russian document to justify to other officials his unusual decision to hold a press conference to announce that Clinton would not face charges — leapfrogging Lynch and ignoring the standard procedure , in which such a decision would not be discussed publicly .
If the document leaked , he reportedly suggested , it could undercut Lynch ’ s authority on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director in May 2017 , triggering a sequence of events that led to the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller .
Trump has repeatedly called for Comey to be investigated for a host of perceived sins against Trump , and has suggested Comey should be jailed .

One of President Trump’s favorite targets is in the DOJ’s crosshairs.
Federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C., are probing whether former FBI Director James Comey leaked classified information about a Russian intelligence document to reporters, The New York Times reported Thursday citing unnamed people familiar with the investigation.
Specifically, the Times reported, investigators are looking into at least two news articles about the document, which played a central role in Comey’s unusual 2016 decision to announce that Hillary Clinton would not face criminal charges for using a private email server as secretary of state.
The document has been described in various reports as a Russian intelligence analysis of a purported email sent from Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), who was then the chair of the Democratic National Committee, to an official at George Soros’ organization, Open Societies Foundations. Some officials have suggested the document is purposeful Russian misinformation, the Times said.
The Russian analysis of the email reportedly stated that Wasserman-Schultz told the Soros official, Leonard Benardo, that then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch would make sure the probe into Clinton’s private email server wouldn’t conclude with charges against Clinton. Wasserman-Schuiltz and Bernardo, the Times noted, both deny being in contact with each other.
Comey reportedly used the intercepted Russian document to justify to other officials his unusual decision to hold a press conference to announce that Clinton would not face charges — leapfrogging Lynch and ignoring the standard procedure, in which such a decision would not be discussed publicly. If the document leaked, he reportedly suggested, it could undercut Lynch’s authority on the matter.
Trump fired Comey as FBI director in May 2017, triggering a sequence of events that led to the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller. Trump has repeatedly called for Comey to be investigated for a host of perceived sins against Trump, and has suggested Comey should be jailed.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-16--Everything Rudy Did, He Did For Trump

Everything Rudy Did, He Did For Trump

When Rudy Giuliani wanted to meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in May 2019 , he made sure to emphasize one thing .
“ I am private counsel to President Donald J. Trump , ” Giuliani wrote .
“ Just to be precise , I represent him as a private citizen , not as President of the United States.
” The thread runs throughout the texts released by former Giuliani henchman Lev Parnas to House panels investigating the President over the weekend .
“ I wouldn ’ t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani , or the president , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday evening .
He added that every contact he had with Ukrainian officials occurred at the direction of Giuliani , and that Ukrainian officials were told that Parnas was acting on behalf of the Trump attorney who was , in turn , acting on behalf of the President .
The texts pick up in November 2018 , with Parnas and Giuliani arranging a meeting with Rep. Pete Sessions ( R-TX ) at Shelly ’ s Backroom , a D.C. cigar bar .
Throughout the texts , Giuliani alludes to the Mueller investigation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On tarmac for almost one hour .
I think Mueller knew I was on this plane and is delaying it so he gets me to say whatever he wants me to say , ” Giuliani texted Parnas in December 2018 .
By January , Parnas was asking Giuliani for help with Ukrainian officials .
Notably , he told the Trump attorney that the visa of former Ukraine general prosecutor Viktor Shokin was “ declined.
” Shokin plays a crucial role in the extended universe of conspiracy theories around Joe Biden and Ukraine .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Biden used his influence as Vice President to pressure Ukraine to fire Shokin in a bid to protect his son , Hunter , from a Ukrainian investigation .
Or , as Giuliani described it in a May text to Parnas , “ Bribery is universally defined as offering something of value ( the 1.2 billion loan guarantee ) to affect official action ( firing Shokin , taking the Burisma case for big money ) .
” Elsewhere in the documents , Giuliani notes that he is acting in his capacity as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point , Giuliani refers to a phone call with “ the big guy , ” and at another moment gives Parnas contact information for Trump attorney Jay Sekulow .
He also drafts statements issued as Trump ’ s attorney in the texts with Parnas , and references meeting with the President .
That led Giuliani in interesting directions via Parnas as time went on .
The last text between the two of them is Giuliani “ liking ” a message Parnas sent him .
The October 9 message contained a link to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Interfax-Ukraine , about a press conference where a Ukrainian MP named Andriy Derkach claimed that Burisma paid Joe Biden $ 900,000 for lobbying .
But the timing of the message suggests that another source had begun to feed evidence to Giuliani via Parnas .
Twenty-five minutes before sending the Interfax story to Giuliani , Parnas received a Russian-language version of the article from a Ukrainian oligarch named Ihor Kolomoisky .
Parnas replied to Kolomoisky at 8:59 , Greenwich Mean Time .
Nine minutes later , he sent an English-language version of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meet Derkach , the MP who made the unsubstantiated allegation in the article , in Kyiv in December .
TPM reported that Giuliani was receiving information from people tied to Kolomoisky while on the trip .
Kolomoisky faces numerous legal problems in the United States , including an FBI investigation .
One day after Parnas sent Giuliani the link , he was intercepted by FBI agents at Washington-Dulles airport and arrested before leaving the country .

When Rudy Giuliani wanted to meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in May 2019, he made sure to emphasize one thing.
“I am private counsel to President Donald J. Trump,” Giuliani wrote. “Just to be precise, I represent him as a private citizen, not as President of the United States.”
The thread runs throughout the texts released by former Giuliani henchman Lev Parnas to House panels investigating the President over the weekend.
“I wouldn’t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani, or the president,” Parnas told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow Wednesday evening.
He added that every contact he had with Ukrainian officials occurred at the direction of Giuliani, and that Ukrainian officials were told that Parnas was acting on behalf of the Trump attorney who was, in turn, acting on behalf of the President.
The texts pick up in November 2018, with Parnas and Giuliani arranging a meeting with Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) at Shelly’s Backroom, a D.C. cigar bar.
Throughout the texts, Giuliani alludes to the Mueller investigation, in terms half-serious and half-facetious.
“On tarmac for almost one hour. I think Mueller knew I was on this plane and is delaying it so he gets me to say whatever he wants me to say,” Giuliani texted Parnas in December 2018.
By January, Parnas was asking Giuliani for help with Ukrainian officials. Notably, he told the Trump attorney that the visa of former Ukraine general prosecutor Viktor Shokin was “declined.”
“I can revive it,” Giuliani replied.
Shokin plays a crucial role in the extended universe of conspiracy theories around Joe Biden and Ukraine. In the fumes of right-wing fever swamps, Biden used his influence as Vice President to pressure Ukraine to fire Shokin in a bid to protect his son, Hunter, from a Ukrainian investigation.
Or, as Giuliani described it in a May text to Parnas, “Bribery is universally defined as offering something of value (the 1.2 billion loan guarantee) to affect official action (firing Shokin, taking the Burisma case for big money).”
Elsewhere in the documents, Giuliani notes that he is acting in his capacity as an attorney for the President.
At one point, Giuliani refers to a phone call with “the big guy,” and at another moment gives Parnas contact information for Trump attorney Jay Sekulow. He also drafts statements issued as Trump’s attorney in the texts with Parnas, and references meeting with the President.
That led Giuliani in interesting directions via Parnas as time went on.
The last text between the two of them is Giuliani “liking” a message Parnas sent him.
The October 9 message contained a link to a story from Ukraine’s wire service, Interfax-Ukraine, about a press conference where a Ukrainian MP named Andriy Derkach claimed that Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying.
But the timing of the message suggests that another source had begun to feed evidence to Giuliani via Parnas.
Twenty-five minutes before sending the Interfax story to Giuliani, Parnas received a Russian-language version of the article from a Ukrainian oligarch named Ihor Kolomoisky.
Parnas replied to Kolomoisky at 8:59, Greenwich Mean Time. Nine minutes later, he sent an English-language version of the story to Giuliani.
Giuliani would later meet Derkach, the MP who made the unsubstantiated allegation in the article, in Kyiv in December.
TPM reported that Giuliani was receiving information from people tied to Kolomoisky while on the trip. Kolomoisky faces numerous legal problems in the United States, including an FBI investigation.
One day after Parnas sent Giuliani the link, he was intercepted by FBI agents at Washington-Dulles airport and arrested before leaving the country.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-01-16--GOP Michigan State Senator Now Says He Was Misquoted

Michigan state Sen. Peter Lucido ( R ) has changed his story on the comment he made to local reporter Allison Donahue that a group of high school boys “ could have fun ” with her .
Initially , he painted the exchange as a “ misunderstanding.
” In subsequent interviews with the Washington Post and WDIV-TV , he said that he was actually misquoted .
“ I said , ‘ We ’ re going on the ( Senate ) floor to have some fun ; you ’ re welcome to join us , ' ” he told WDIV-TV , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He changed his tune from the initial tweet as the story started attracting national attention and Michigan Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey ( R ) and Minority Leader Jim Ananich ( D ) asked the Senate Business Office to conduct a sexual harassment investigation into the interaction .
Lucido did not respond to TPM ’ s request for clarification .
During the initial interaction , Donahue was trying to interview Lucido about his membership in a Facebook group violently opposed to Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer ( D ) when he put her off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from his high school alma mater .
As he walked away , Donahue recalled that he said “ you could have a lot of fun with these boys , or they could have a lot of fun with you.
” When he came back , she told him she ’ d found the remark “ unprofessional.
” He said that he was merely referring to the awkwardness boys from all-male schools feel around women .
Donahue has the second part of the conversation recorded and embedded in the first-person account she wrote for @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Michigan state Sen. Peter Lucido (R) has changed his story on the comment he made to local reporter Allison Donahue that a group of high school boys “could have fun” with her.
Initially, he painted the exchange as a “misunderstanding.”
I apologize for the misunderstanding yesterday and for offending Allison Donahue. — Sen. Peter J. Lucido (@SenPeterJLucido) January 15, 2020
In subsequent interviews with the Washington Post and WDIV-TV, he said that he was actually misquoted.
“I said, ‘We’re going on the (Senate) floor to have some fun; you’re welcome to join us,'” he told WDIV-TV, blaming Donahue for misinterpreting his remark.
He changed his tune from the initial tweet as the story started attracting national attention and Michigan Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey (R) and Minority Leader Jim Ananich (D) asked the Senate Business Office to conduct a sexual harassment investigation into the interaction.
Lucido did not respond to TPM’s request for clarification.
During the initial interaction, Donahue was trying to interview Lucido about his membership in a Facebook group violently opposed to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) when he put her off to first honor a group of boys from his high school alma mater. As he walked away, Donahue recalled that he said “you could have a lot of fun with these boys, or they could have a lot of fun with you.”
When he came back, she told him she’d found the remark “unprofessional.” He said that he was merely referring to the awkwardness boys from all-male schools feel around women. Donahue has the second part of the conversation recorded and embedded in the first-person account she wrote for her paper, the Michigan Advance.