rawstory--2020-01-16--‘Breathtaking’: MSNBC’s Morning Joe stunned by bombshells Lev Parnas dropped in Rachel Maddow interv

‘Breathtaking’: MSNBC’s Morning Joe stunned by bombshells Lev Parnas dropped in Rachel Maddow interview

MSNBC ’ s Joe Scarborough was gobsmacked by colleague Rachel Maddow ’ s interview of Rudy Giuliani ’ s indicted henchman Lev Parnas .
The “ Morning Joe ” host said the Ukraine-born businessman dropped a number of bombshells during the interview , and he applauded House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for holding onto the articles of impeachment until more evidence would be revealed .
“ I ’ m trying to remember the last time that an interview revealed as much as Rachel Maddow ’ s interview last night revealed , ” Scarborough said , “ and actually moved a story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as that interview did .
It was breathtaking what was revealed in the interview.
” Scarborough said Parnas exposed lies by President Donald Trump , Vice President Mike Pence , Attorney General Bill Barr , Rep. Devin Nunes and other Republicans during the interview .
“ Even Devin Nunes , everybody knew he was lying , that he was being a liar when he said he didn ’ t know who Lev was , and even last night I think it was he had to go out and admit , oh , yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scarborough said .
“ They all know him , all had pictures with him .
Apparently the vice president of the United States caught lying , the president caught lying , the attorney general , all of them , caught lying.
” He said the interview showed Pelosi ’ s pause on impeachment was a wise political move .
“ This is why it ’ s important to have an inner voice , where you can tune everybody out , ” Scarborough said .
“ Nancy Pelosi holding up the articles of impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revealed so much in that time when Republicans were trying — and right-wing Trumpists were trying to pressure her and saying , oh , this is the worst thing ever .
Even Democrats last week started whining about , oh , send them over here.
” “ If I have any criticism of Nancy , ” he added , “ she should have held them a couple more weeks , because the space she has created — we didn ’ t even know John Bolton was going to testify until Nancy Pelosi gave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course , they wanted to get the articles of impeachment because they wanted to kill them .
They wanted to club them like baby seals , and get rid of them immediately .
Wipe them to the side and move on and pretend this never happened .
Well , this happened and last night yet another explosion .
”

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough was gobsmacked by colleague Rachel Maddow's interview of Rudy Giuliani's indicted henchman Lev Parnas.
The "Morning Joe" host said the Ukraine-born businessman dropped a number of bombshells during the interview, and he applauded House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for holding onto the articles of impeachment until more evidence would be revealed.
"I'm trying to remember the last time that an interview revealed as much as Rachel Maddow's interview last night revealed," Scarborough said, "and actually moved a story of national and international significance as much as that interview did. It was breathtaking what was revealed in the interview."
Scarborough said Parnas exposed lies by President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Attorney General Bill Barr, Rep. Devin Nunes and other Republicans during the interview.
"Even Devin Nunes, everybody knew he was lying, that he was being a liar when he said he didn't know who Lev was, and even last night I think it was he had to go out and admit, oh, yes, I do remember now," Scarborough said. "They all know him, all had pictures with him. Apparently the vice president of the United States caught lying, the president caught lying, the attorney general, all of them, caught lying."
He said the interview showed Pelosi's pause on impeachment was a wise political move.
"This is why it's important to have an inner voice, where you can tune everybody out," Scarborough said. "Nancy Pelosi holding up the articles of impeachment for as long as she did has revealed so much in that time when Republicans were trying -- and right-wing Trumpists were trying to pressure her and saying, oh, this is the worst thing ever. Even Democrats last week started whining about, oh, send them over here."
"If I have any criticism of Nancy," he added, "she should have held them a couple more weeks, because the space she has created -- we didn't even know John Bolton was going to testify until Nancy Pelosi gave this process time to breathe. Of course, they wanted to get the articles of impeachment because they wanted to kill them. They wanted to club them like baby seals, and get rid of them immediately. Wipe them to the side and move on and pretend this never happened. Well, this happened and last night yet another explosion."


rawstory--2020-01-16--Here are 7 explosive claims from Lev Parnas’ interview with Rachel Maddow blowing up the Ukraine sca

Here are 7 explosive claims from Lev Parnas’ interview with Rachel Maddow blowing up the Ukraine scandal

In his first media appearance , Lev Parnas — an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani who was a key player in President Donald Trump ’ s impeachment — gave an explosive interview this week , aired Wednesday night , to MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow .
As is often the case in Trump scandals , the person who has now turned against the president is himself a shady character who is credibly accused of federal crimes , which makes it necessary to treat his claims with due skepticism .
Though some of his allegations are corroborated by records and evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his allegations rely on vague allegations and assumptions and given they come from a source with unclear motivations , they should not be taken as definitive fact .
But they are in the public record now , and they deserve to be considered .
As the Senate gears up for Trump ’ s impeachment trial , it sets the stage for a testing ground for the accuracy of Parnas ’ claims and those of other witnesses .
Maddow also revealed that she will air a second part of the interview the following night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explosive claims Parnas made : 1 .
“ President Trump knew exactly what was going on , ” Parnas said .
“ He was aware of all of my movements .
I wouldn ’ t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president.
” Trump has claimed that he doesn ’ t know who Parnas or his associate , Igor Fruman , are , despite appearing in multiple pictures with him .
There was already good reason to assume this was false , but Parnas has not directly rebutted the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It was not about corruption , ” Parnas said of the Ukraine scheme .
“ It was all about Burisma , all about Biden , about Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.
” This claim completely undercuts the Republicans ’ key defenses of the president against impeachment .
They say he was legitimately pursuing an anti-corruption policy in Ukraine by asking for investigations of his political enemies .
That was hard to believe on its own , but now Parnas is flatly contradicting it .
3 .
Parnas said it was clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s emissary .
“ Did anybody in the U.S. government or Mr. Giuliani actually convey to officials in Ukraine that you were there as a representative of President Trump ?
” Maddow asked .
Guiliani told Maddow that this “ never ” happened and called Parnas a “ sad situation.
” 4 .
He said he made explicit to Ukrainian officials that Trump ’ s support and financial support — not just military aid — was dependent on an announcement of the investigations the president wanted .
“ It wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ It was all aid .
Basically their relationships would be sour .
That we would stop giving them any kind of aid.
” 5 .
Vice President Mike Pence ’ s visit to Ukraine was canceled explicitly to induce the country to announce the investigations , Parnas said .
Parnas said that the cancellation of Pence ’ s trip confirmed to the Ukrainians that he was a legitimate representative of the president .
He also said that Pence was “ in the loop ” about the reason the trip was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explicit say how he knew this .
He just indicated the top players were all aware of the plot .
Pence ’ s later trip to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was arranged to get the country to announce the investigations Trump wanted , Parnas said .
However , Pence has denied trying to get Zelensky to conduct the investigations .
Barr has also tried to distance himself entirely from the Ukraine scandal .
But Parnas claimed that “ Barr had to know about everything ” regarding the plan to push Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential election .
He acknowledged , though , that he didn ’ t speak to Barr directly .
Maddow pointed out that , in his infamous July 25 phone call with Zelensky , Trump specifically brought up Barr as being involved .
Parnas said that didn ’ t surprise him , because Barr was “ on the team.
” The Justice Department , responding to Maddow ’ s request for comment on the allegations , said simply : “ 100 percent false.
” 7 .
Parnas also fingered Rep. Devin Nunes ( R-CA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee that investigated the Ukraine matter .
Parnas said he was introduced to , and worked through , Nunes aide Derek Harvey , but he was working on Nunes ’ behalf .
“ Does it strike you as unusual or inappropriate that Devin Nunes would be one of the lead investigators ?
” Maddow asked .
“ I was in shock when I was watching the hearings and when I saw Devin Nunes sitting up there , ” Parnas said .
“ Because they were involved in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

In his first media appearance, Lev Parnas — an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani who was a key player in President Donald Trump’s impeachment — gave an explosive interview this week, aired Wednesday night, to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
As is often the case in Trump scandals, the person who has now turned against the president is himself a shady character who is credibly accused of federal crimes, which makes it necessary to treat his claims with due skepticism. Though some of his allegations are corroborated by records and evidence, others are not. Some of his allegations rely on vague allegations and assumptions and given they come from a source with unclear motivations, they should not be taken as definitive fact. But they are in the public record now, and they deserve to be considered. As the Senate gears up for Trump’s impeachment trial, it sets the stage for a testing ground for the accuracy of Parnas’ claims and those of other witnesses.
Maddow also revealed that she will air a second part of the interview the following night.
Here are seven of the most explosive claims Parnas made:
1. “President Trump knew exactly what was going on,” Parnas said. “He was aware of all of my movements. I wouldn’t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president.”
Trump has claimed that he doesn’t know who Parnas or his associate, Igor Fruman, are, despite appearing in multiple pictures with him. There was already good reason to assume this was false, but Parnas has not directly rebutted the dubious claim on the record.
2. “It was not about corruption,” Parnas said of the Ukraine scheme. “It was all about Burisma, all about Biden, about Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.”
This claim completely undercuts the Republicans’ key defenses of the president against impeachment. They say he was legitimately pursuing an anti-corruption policy in Ukraine by asking for investigations of his political enemies. That was hard to believe on its own, but now Parnas is flatly contradicting it.
3. Parnas said it was clear to the Ukrainians he was acting as Trump’s emissary.
“Did anybody in the U.S. government or Mr. Giuliani actually convey to officials in Ukraine that you were there as a representative of President Trump?” Maddow asked.
“Yes,” said Parnas. “Absolutely. Absolutely. Everyone.”
Giuliani told Maddow that this “never” happened and called Parnas a “sad situation.”
4. He said he made explicit to Ukrainian officials that Trump’s support and financial support — not just military aid — was dependent on an announcement of the investigations the president wanted.
“It wasn’t just military aid,” Parnas said. “It was all aid. Basically their relationships would be sour. That we would stop giving them any kind of aid.”
5. Vice President Mike Pence’s visit to Ukraine was canceled explicitly to induce the country to announce the investigations, Parnas said.
Parnas said that the cancellation of Pence’s trip confirmed to the Ukrainians that he was a legitimate representative of the president. He also said that Pence was “in the loop” about the reason the trip was canceled, but he didn’t explicitly say how he knew this. He just indicated the top players were all aware of the plot.
Pence’s later trip to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was arranged to get the country to announce the investigations Trump wanted, Parnas said. However, Pence has denied trying to get Zelensky to conduct the investigations.
6. Attorney General Bill Barr was “on the team.”
Barr has also tried to distance himself entirely from the Ukraine scandal. But Parnas claimed that “Barr had to know about everything” regarding the plan to push Ukraine to investigate the Biden and the 2016 presidential election. He acknowledged, though, that he didn’t speak to Barr directly.
Maddow pointed out that, in his infamous July 25 phone call with Zelensky, Trump specifically brought up Barr as being involved. Parnas said that didn’t surprise him, because Barr was “on the team.” The Justice Department, responding to Maddow’s request for comment on the allegations, said simply: “100 percent false.”
7. Parnas also fingered Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) in the scheme, the ranking Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee that investigated the Ukraine matter.
Parnas said he was introduced to, and worked through, Nunes aide Derek Harvey, but he was working on Nunes’ behalf.
“Does it strike you as unusual or inappropriate that Devin Nunes would be one of the lead investigators?” Maddow asked.
“I was in shock when I was watching the hearings and when I saw Devin Nunes sitting up there,” Parnas said. “Because they were involved in getting all this stuff on Biden.”


rawstory--2020-01-16--Trump isn’t just lying about the Suleimani threat — he’s covering up the fact that the strike was il

Trump isn’t just lying about the Suleimani threat — he’s covering up the fact that the strike was illegal: law professor

President Donald Trump has frequently changed his story on the nature of the “ imminent threat ” posed by Iranian general Qassim Suleimani that led him to order a strike to take him out , leading many to believe that his justification is based on lies .
But that betrays something much more fundamental , wrote NYU Law professor Rebecca Ingber in the Washington Post .
Trump is trying to cover up the fact that he had no legal justification to order the strike in the first place .
“ The question of imminence is crucial under both domestic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Under the U.N. Charter , the president ’ s authority to kill Soleimani required that the United States was facing an armed attack — as well as that the use of force was necessary to repel or prevent it .
The United States has long understood that doctrine to also permit force necessary to stop an imminent attack .
Whether an attack was truly imminent is also key to the domestic legal question , because U.S. law does not permit the president to use force unilaterally ( that is , without congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ circumstances.
” “ These legal questions are no mere technicalities , ” continued Ingber .
“ The purpose behind the law is to limit unnecessary war to the greatest possible extent .
U.S. presidents have at times pushed the limits of such laws , but doing so has dire consequences — including unnecessary conflict , civilian casualties and the lost trust of our allies , as well as of the U.S. public.
” Many in the Trump administration have tried to argue the strike was justified by past threats from Iran , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases in which Quds-backed Iran forces attacked U.S. military targets in the region .
However , wrote Ingber , “ Even were each of the acts listed in the letter both attributable to Iran and properly characterized as armed attacks — a stretch for various reasons , including that the U.S. drone was itself unmanned and that Iran claimed it shot it down in Iranian airspace — the use of force in response must still be necessary to stop an ongoing attack or prevent one .
Soleimani ’ s history , and Iran @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the nature of any current threat .
But the use of force as retaliation or punishment for a past wrong is strictly prohibited under international law ; the narrow exceptions the charter permits do not include revenge .
So we are back to the original question : whether Soleimani posed an immediate threat for which the use of force was necessary.
” “ Finally , even were an attack against Iran itself justified , the fact that the Soleimani strike took place in Iraq makes the question of imminence even more important , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , did not itself attack us .
A crucial step in determining whether it is necessary to use force on the territory of a state that did not itself attack us — the long-standing U.S. approach , dating to the Caroline incident , increasingly adopted by other states — has been to , first , establish the imminence of a forthcoming attack and then to analyze whether that state is itself unwilling or unable to prevent or stop the attack .
The administration has not put forward evidence on either question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue of Iraqi sovereignty.
” “ The most significant check on a president who has little inherent interest in law or norms is a political one , ” concluded Ingber .
“ Elections matter .
Law can constrain the president , but only if we care , sufficiently and in sufficient numbers , when he violates it.
” You can read more here .

President Donald Trump has frequently changed his story on the nature of the "imminent threat" posed by Iranian general Qassim Suleimani that led him to order a strike to take him out, leading many to believe that his justification is based on lies.
But that betrays something much more fundamental, wrote NYU Law professor Rebecca Ingber in the Washington Post. Trump is trying to cover up the fact that he had no legal justification to order the strike in the first place.
"The question of imminence is crucial under both domestic and international law," wrote Ingber. "Under the U.N. Charter, the president’s authority to kill Soleimani required that the United States was facing an armed attack — as well as that the use of force was necessary to repel or prevent it. The United States has long understood that doctrine to also permit force necessary to stop an imminent attack. Whether an attack was truly imminent is also key to the domestic legal question, because U.S. law does not permit the president to use force unilaterally (that is, without congressional authorization) outside of the most exigent circumstances."
"These legal questions are no mere technicalities," continued Ingber. "The purpose behind the law is to limit unnecessary war to the greatest possible extent. U.S. presidents have at times pushed the limits of such laws, but doing so has dire consequences — including unnecessary conflict, civilian casualties and the lost trust of our allies, as well as of the U.S. public."
Many in the Trump administration have tried to argue the strike was justified by past threats from Iran, with Ambassador Kelly Craft listing a series of cases in which Quds-backed Iran forces attacked U.S. military targets in the region.
However, wrote Ingber, "Even were each of the acts listed in the letter both attributable to Iran and properly characterized as armed attacks — a stretch for various reasons, including that the U.S. drone was itself unmanned and that Iran claimed it shot it down in Iranian airspace — the use of force in response must still be necessary to stop an ongoing attack or prevent one. Soleimani’s history, and Iran’s, provide context for analyzing the nature of any current threat. But the use of force as retaliation or punishment for a past wrong is strictly prohibited under international law; the narrow exceptions the charter permits do not include revenge. So we are back to the original question: whether Soleimani posed an immediate threat for which the use of force was necessary."
"Finally, even were an attack against Iran itself justified, the fact that the Soleimani strike took place in Iraq makes the question of imminence even more important," wrote Ingber. "Iraq, of course, did not itself attack us. A crucial step in determining whether it is necessary to use force on the territory of a state that did not itself attack us — the long-standing U.S. approach, dating to the Caroline incident, increasingly adopted by other states — has been to, first, establish the imminence of a forthcoming attack and then to analyze whether that state is itself unwilling or unable to prevent or stop the attack. The administration has not put forward evidence on either question — and has not even addressed the issue of Iraqi sovereignty."
"The most significant check on a president who has little inherent interest in law or norms is a political one," concluded Ingber. "Elections matter. Law can constrain the president, but only if we care, sufficiently and in sufficient numbers, when he violates it."
You can read more here.


rawstory--2020-01-16--President Trump has now given us the ‘Drunk Watergate’: Presidential historian Jon Meacham

Presidential historian Jon Meacham compared President Donald Trump to previous presidents who have a group of advisers outside of the normal appointees .
The problem with Trump ’ s , however , is that his group of advisers seem to be men at the bar of the Trump hotel .
In the cash of documents from Rudy Giuliani ’ s associate Lev Parnas , it was discovered that a Republican Congressional candidate was messaging Parnas about possible henchmen that were tailing then-Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch .
Robert Hyde is pictured with several members of Trump ’ s administration as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House and Senate leadership .
Parnas told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow in an interview Wednesday that he didn ’ t think that Hyde was serious about the information regarding the stalking of Yovanovitch because Hyde tended to be drunk more often than not .
Typically , according to Parnas , Hyde would appear at the Trump hotel , where he would drink so much that Parnas said he “ never saw Hyde when he wasn ’ t drunk.
” “ Reagan had the California kitchen cabinet .
FDR had the brain trust .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a drunk Watergate , ” Meacham said .
“ These folks , if it weren ’ t so serious it would be funny .
But it is incredibly serious because they were running around dealing with foreign policy , dealing with lives on the line in Ukraine , our security interests .
The truth will out .
And what ’ s remarkable is usually we have to wait a number of years before documents emerge , before people tell the truth .
Everything is so sped up now that I suspect we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the whole story , we ’ re going to continue to learn more and more as this remarkable and incredibly complicated era unfolds.
” See his comments below :

Presidential historian Jon Meacham compared President Donald Trump to previous presidents who have a group of advisers outside of the normal appointees. The problem with Trump's, however, is that his group of advisers seem to be men at the bar of the Trump hotel.
In the cache of documents from Rudy Giuliani's associate Lev Parnas, it was discovered that a Republican Congressional candidate was messaging Parnas about possible henchmen that were tailing then-Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch. Robert Hyde is pictured with several members of Trump's administration as well as a group of high-level Republicans in House and Senate leadership.
Parnas told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow in an interview Wednesday that he didn't think that Hyde was serious about the information regarding the stalking of Yovanovitch because Hyde tended to be drunk more often than not. Typically, according to Parnas, Hyde would appear at the Trump hotel, where he would drink so much that Parnas said he "never saw Hyde when he wasn't drunk."
"Reagan had the California kitchen cabinet. FDR had the brain trust. President Trump has given us now kind of a drunk Watergate," Meacham said. "These folks, if it weren't so serious it would be funny. But it is incredibly serious because they were running around dealing with foreign policy, dealing with lives on the line in Ukraine, our security interests. The truth will out. And what's remarkable is usually we have to wait a number of years before documents emerge, before people tell the truth. Everything is so sped up now that I suspect we're going to know if not the whole story, we're going to continue to learn more and more as this remarkable and incredibly complicated era unfolds."
Comedian John Oliver mocked Trump's Russia scandal as "stupid Watergate."
See his comments below:


rawstory--2020-01-16--‘Bill Barr can’t do a criminal investigation on a matter he’s involved in’: Ex-federal prosecutor ca

‘Bill Barr can’t do a criminal investigation on a matter he’s involved in’: Ex-federal prosecutor calls for special prosecutor

Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance appeared on MSNBC in the wake of Rachel Maddow ’ s interview with Lev Parnas @ @ @ @ @ revelations was a link that Parnas provided about Attorney General Bill Barr being “ in @ @ @ @ @ .
One fact being lost in the conversation about the trunk-load of documents Parnas provided @ @ @ @ @ Justice has had the documents for three months as part of the Parnas indictment .
@ @ @ @ @ or any of his prosecutors indicate that the documents revealed evidence of an international conspiracy @ @ @ @ @ host Brian Williams , Vance explained that Barr is no longer an independent actor .
@ @ @ @ @ a special counsel , ” she demanded .
“ Why is that ?
Because it @ @ @ @ @ Barr can ’ t conduct a criminal investigation about a matter that he is perhaps @ @ @ @ @ be a witness in .
Impeachment is only about the president .
There are criminal @ @ @ @ @ special counsel can get to the bottom of that .
”

"I just want to go back to Giuliani for a second, since you know these characters all so well," said anchor Joy Reid. "I want to read you what The New York Times — there was an opinion piece by one of his biographers, Andrew Kirtzman and David Holly what they wrote about Rudy has become. They wrote this. 'Faced with the political irrelevance and collapsing client base that would accompany Mr. Trump's defeat, in 2020, he seemingly made a Faustian bargain, working to undermine democracy in order to save his career.' I feel like it was a few years before that. What do you make of the fact that the RICO guy is now the RICO defendant?"
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
"Well, it's Shakespearean in its dimensions, because Rudy was an evangelist about the rule of law in a very draconian way," said O'Brien. "And he used RICO, I think, to great effect, as we all know to go after the mob. The argument being that you could never touch the people at the head of the mob families, because they were very good at insulating their own actions from their minions who went out there, soldiers out on the street, who did the crimes. Rudy said, it was very important to attach what lower-level people did to the people orchestrating the schemes. Shades of Donald Trump much later. Everybody who has been pulled up in the January 6th investigation has complained that they came there because Trump asked them to come here. They thought they were doing what they had been told to do, and yet Trump wasn't being held accountable."
"The argument against RICO being used by Fani Willis to go after Trump is then that it's overreach," continued O'Brien. "That it should only go after organized crime. But the statute is meant to go against organized criminal conspiracies, not necessarily just conspiracies that Italian mobsters were targeted for. And in that context, one of Giuliani's biggest cases in addition to the commission case targeting the mobsters was Wall Street. He brought down Drexel Burnham. He targeted Michael Milken, he cited the person in the financial web involving insider trading and financial fraud. He himself recognized that RICO wasn't a statute that should only be used against people we traditionally call organized criminals. Fani Willis, as you noted in your opening, has also adapted it to target other people, including drug dealers. And so, I think that the idea that this thing that he created has now come around and snapped him up is both ironic but overdue because he sold himself out and he sold himself out to Trump."
"It's a reminder how easily Trump corrupts people in his orbit, but he can only corrupt them if they're corruptible," O'Brien added. "And Rudy, for all of his finger-wagging over the years at people of color for being street criminals, mobsters and many others for not following the rule of law, has now shown he's just as base and just as craven as any number of the people he once prosecuted."
Watch the video below or at the link here.


rawstory--2020-01-16--Internet breaks out with congratulations to ‘President Pelosi’ as Lev Parnas links Mike Pence to Tru

Internet breaks out with congratulations to ‘President Pelosi’ as Lev Parnas links Mike Pence to Trump’s Ukraine scandal

Rudy Giuliani ’ s associate Lev Parnas spoke with MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow Wednesday , revealing a cash of @ @ @ @ @ Mike Pence , Attorney General Bill Barr and Rep. Devin Nunes ( R-CA ) to @ @ @ @ @ bribery scandal with Ukraine .
Given the involvement by Pence , it would mean that @ @ @ @ @ president could be impeached and removed from office in this scandal .
While it isn @ @ @ @ @ have indicated they don ’ t care what the evidence shows , it prompted many @ @ @ @ @ House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) was ready to move over to the White @ @ @ @ @ in line for the presidency .
You can see the responses from Twitter below :

President Joe Biden defeated Trump in the 2020 election by more than 7 million votes nationally, more than 11,000 votes in Georgia and more than 154,000 votes in Michigan.
The Fulton County grand jury’s 98-page indictment cites charges of conspiracy, racketeering, forgery and perjury, among other charges, totaling 41 charges against 19 individuals. Those charged include Trump and Giuliani, as well as Trump’s former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and ex-Georgia Republican Party Chairman David Shafer.
The investigation that led to the indictment stems from a recording of a phone call was released to the public at the start of 2021 where Trump asked Republican Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes” after Trump was the first Republican presidential candidate to lose Georgia in almost 30 years.
The indictment cites Michigan several times, saying, “Trump and the other Defendants charged in this Indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.”
Then-Michigan House Speaker Lee Chatfield (R-Levering) and then-Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey (R-Clarklake), along with other Michigan GOP lawmakers, met with Trump on Nov. 20, 2020, in the Oval Office. The indictment said the “meeting was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy” that the 2020 election was wrought with fraud.
Shortly after, on Dec. 2, Giuliani and another indicted supporter of Trump, attorney Jenna Ellis, were invited to the Michigan House of Representatives Oversight Committee, which was chaired at the time by Rep. Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp.). Hall is now the House minority leader.
Both Ellis and Giuliani spread misinformation about the 2020 election Trump lost. Giuliani was allowed to question those testifying, in a break with typical hearings.
The day after Giuliani’s visit to Michigan, the Georgia grand jury says he committed the felony offense of false statements when knowingly and unlawfully told the Georgia Senate Judiciary Subcommittee that at least 96,600 mail-in ballots were fraudulent in the state.
He added that the Dominion Voting Systems equipment used in the presidential election in Antrim County, Mich., recorded 6,000 votes for Biden when the votes were actually for Trump, which is misleading as the error was quickly rectified before any official count.
During the Michigan hearing, Ellis implored lawmakers to take the reins on certifying the election and refuse to certify election results. She and Giuliani brought a host of speakers who claimed mass fraud in the 2020 election and rejected state electors who didn’t support a Trump victory.
Kathy Berden (left), 70, appears over Zoom in a Lansing court on August 10, 2023. (Photo: Anna Liz Nichols)
As Biden won Michigan, a winner-take-all state, he won all 16 electoral votes. On Dec. 14, 2020, the Democratic slate of electors met at the Michigan Capitol to cast their votes for Biden.
However, a group of 16 Republicans met, as well. Fake documents were submitted to the National Archives in an attempt to certify Trump as the winner of Michigan in 2020.
The 16 Republicans were charged by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel in July with several felonies. The group includes former Michigan Republican Party Co-Chair Meshawn Maddock, Michigan GOP National Committeewoman Kathy Berden, Wyoming Mayor Kent Vanderwood and Shelby Township Trustee and Clerk Stanley Grot.
All 16 individuals have been arraigned and pleaded not guilty.
Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Susan Demas for questions: info@michiganadvance.com. Follow Michigan Advance on Facebook and Twitter.


rawstory--2020-01-16--Devin Nunes said he’d sue fellow Congressman after allegation ‘Nunes conspired with Parnas’

Rep. Devin Nunes was outed by Rudy Giuliani ’ s associate Lev Parnas in an interview with MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow Wednesday .
In the conversation , Parnas explained that he and Nunes didn ’ t have much of a relationship until he was told to work with Nunes ’ aid Derek Harvey .
“ We met several times at the Trump Hotel , but our relationship started getting — basically where it expanded was when I was introduced to his aide , Derek Harvey , and the reason why Derek Harvey I was told because Devin Nunes had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Ethics Committee , he couldn ’ t be in the spotlight .
He was kind of shunned a little bit and that he was looking into this Ukraine stuff also , wanted to help out .
And they gave me Derek Harvey to deal with , ” said Parnas .
Rep. Ted Lieu ( D-CA ) remarked that last month he attacked Nunes , saying that he was conspiring with Parnas .
Nunes ’ response to it was to threaten to sue his fellow Congressman if Lieu didn ’ t apologize .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maddow , ” tweeted Lieu .
“ Also , I ’ m disclosing that the lawyer for @ DevinNunes wrote a letter saying Rep Nunes will sue me if I didn ’ t apologize for saying last month that Nunes conspired with Parnas.
” Nunes is currently involved in several lawsuits where he is suing people who have criticized him .
Two parody Twitter accounts , one pretending to be Nunes ’ mother and another pretending to be his cow , are among those fighting million-dollar cases from the California Congressman .
Nunes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fresno Bee , for a report they did on Nunes ’ investment in a vineyard that held fundraisers with prostitutes and drugs .
Suing a fellow colleague does not seem to be a longshot .

Rep. Devin Nunes was outed by Rudy Giuliani's associate Lev Parnas in an interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Wednesday.
In the conversation, Parnas explained that he and Nunes didn't have much of a relationship until he was told to work with Nunes' aide Derek Harvey.
"We met several times at the Trump Hotel, but our relationship started getting -- basically where it expanded was when I was introduced to his aide, Derek Harvey, and the reason why Derek Harvey I was told because Devin Nunes had an ethics -- something to do with the Ethics Committee, he couldn't be in the spotlight. He was kind of shunned a little bit and that he was looking into this Ukraine stuff also, wanted to help out. And they gave me Derek Harvey to deal with," said Parnas.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) remarked that last month he attacked Nunes, saying that he was conspiring with Parnas. Nunes' response to it was to threaten to sue his fellow congressman if Lieu didn't apologize.
"A-mazing Lev Parnas interview on #Maddow," tweeted Lieu. "Also, I’m disclosing that the lawyer for @DevinNunes wrote a letter saying Rep Nunes will sue me if I didn’t apologize for saying last month that Nunes conspired with Parnas."
Nunes is currently involved in several lawsuits where he is suing people who have criticized him. Two parody Twitter accounts, one pretending to be Nunes' mother and another pretending to be his cow, are among those fighting million-dollar cases from the California congressman. Nunes is also suing his hometown newspaper The Fresno Bee, for a report they did on Nunes' investment in a vineyard that held fundraisers with prostitutes and drugs.


rawstory--2020-01-16--Lev Parnas says Devin Nunes was ‘involved in getting all this stuff on Biden’

Rep. Devin Nunes was one of the many people Lev Parnas said was linked to President Donald Trump ’ s Ukraine scandal .
“ We don ’ t have too much of a relationship , ” Parnas said of Nunes .
“ We met several times at the Trump Hotel , but our relationship started getting — basically where it expanded was when I was introduced to his aide , Derek Harvey , and the reason why Derek Harvey I was told because Devin Nunes had an ethics — something to do with the Ethics Committee , he couldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was kind of shunned a little bit and that he was looking into this Ukraine stuff also , wanted to help out .
And they gave me Derek Harvey to deal with.
” MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow asked if Parnas then briefed Harvey on what was going on in Ukraine , but Parnas said that Harvey “ knew about it already.
” “ He had a lot of information already , ” Parnas said .
Maddow asked if Parnas got the idea that Rudy Giuliani had briefed Nunes , but Parnas said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because there was a group of people working on opposition research for the campaigns .
Parnas described one of the more shocking moments for him came when he saw Nunes and Harvey sitting in the room for the Intelligence Committee hearing that preceded the impeachment trial .
“ I was in shock when I was watching the hearings and when I saw Devin Nunes sitting up there , and then there was a picture where Harvey was in the back sitting .
I texted my attorney ‘ I can ’ t believe this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Maddow asked why he was so shocked .
“ Because they were involved in getting all this stuff on Biden , ” Parnas said .
He went on to say that he set up “ several Skype interviews ” with people for Havery including a key anti-corruption prosecutor in Ukraine as well as Konstantin Kulik , deputy head of the Department of International Legal Cooperation of the General Prosecutor ’ s Office in Ukraine .
Kulik is “ one of the major guys who had this whole Biden stuff.
” “ So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them lie like that when you know it ’ s like that , ” Parnas said .
“ It ’ s scary because you know , he was sitting there and making all these statements and all that when he knew very well that he knew what was going on .
He knew what ’ s happening .
He knows who I am .
”

Rep. Devin Nunes was one of the many people Lev Parnas said was linked to President Donald Trump's Ukraine scandal.
"We don't have too much of a relationship," Parnas said of Nunes. "We met several times at the Trump Hotel, but our relationship started getting -- basically where it expanded was when I was introduced to his aide, Derek Harvey, and the reason why Derek Harvey I was told because Devin Nunes had an ethics -- something to do with the Ethics Committee, he couldn't be in the spotlight. He was kind of shunned a little bit and that he was looking into this Ukraine stuff also, wanted to help out. And they gave me Derek Harvey to deal with."
MSNBC's Rachel Maddow asked if Parnas then briefed Harvey on what was going on in Ukraine, but Parnas said that Harvey "knew about it already."
"He had a lot of information already," Parnas said.
Maddow asked if Parnas got the idea that Rudy Giuliani had briefed Nunes, but Parnas said he didn't think so, because there was a group of people working on opposition research for the campaigns.
Parnas described one of the more shocking moments for him came when he saw Nunes and Harvey sitting in the room for the Intelligence Committee hearing that preceded the impeachment trial.
"I was in shock when I was watching the hearings and when I saw Devin Nunes sitting up there, and then there was a picture where Harvey was in the back sitting. I texted my attorney 'I can't believe this is happening,'" he said.
Maddow asked why he was so shocked.
"Because they were involved in getting all this stuff on Biden," Parnas said.
He went on to say that he set up "several Skype interviews" with people for Harvey including a key anti-corruption prosecutor in Ukraine as well as Konstantin Kulik, deputy head of the Department of International Legal Cooperation of the General Prosecutor's Office in Ukraine.
Kulik is "one of the major guys who had this whole Biden stuff."
"So, it's hard to see them lie like that when you know it's like that," Parnas said. "It's scary because you know, he was sitting there and making all these statements and all that when he knew very well that he knew what was going on. He knew what's happening. He knows who I am."
Watch the video below:


rawstory--2020-01-16--Bill Barr was ‘on the team’ trying to advance Giuliani’s scheme in Ukraine: Lev Parnas

During his interview on Wednesday with MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow , indicted Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas alleged that @ @ @ @ @ a major player in the scheme to pressure the government of Ukraine into announcing an @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden ’ s family .
“ Attorney General Barr was basically on the team @ @ @ @ @ “ Mr .
Barr had to know about everything.
” “ I did not personally @ @ @ @ @ Barr ] , but I was involved in lots of conversations that Joe diGenova did @ @ @ @ @ front of me , and setting up meetings with , ” added Parnas .
The @ @ @ @ @ White House documenting the infamous summer phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President @ @ @ @ @ Barr was involved in the scheme .
Trump told Zelensky to coordinate with Barr as @ @ @ @ @ his supposed interest in fighting “ corruption.
” The Justice Department has immediately pushed back @ @ @ @ @ calling it “ 100 percent false .
”

But on March 10, just after a jury convicted Householder and Borges, a reporter asked Parker an obvious question: What about the people who paid the bribes? Would they be charged? Parker would only say that the investigation was continuing.
Attorneys for the men who were FirstEnergy’s top executives at the time of the conspiracy — former CEO Chuck Jones and former Vice President Michael Dowling — have already said in court filings that they believe federal investigators are looking at their clients.
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
This month brought two more pieces of evidence that federal investigators are considering further prosecutions in the bribery and money laundering scandal.
On Aug. 4, Hilary M. Williams, who is representing FirstEnergy, submitted a filing in a massive class-action case against the company over the bailout scandal. She informed the scores of lawyers for the pension and investment funds suing the company that they’re not the only ones who want to see the emails and text messages the FirstEnergy executives sent as the bribery scheme was taking place.
“Counsel… we confirmed this morning that we may disclose to the parties that certain governmental authorities have requested the production of the entire contents of iPad and iPhone devices used by Mr. Jones or Mr. Dowling from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2020,” Williams wrote. “In keeping with the protocol in this matter, those documents will be produced to all parties, and we expect to do so at approximately the same time that production is made to the requesting governmental authorities.”
She added. “Mr. Dowling and Mr. Jones used more than a dozen devices during the relevant time period, and processing and reviewing the contents of those devices requires substantial processing time and then time to review for confidentiality and privilege. We are working to complete the review as quickly as possible, and expect to make these productions on or about September 15, 2023.”
A spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office didn’t comment on whether the “governmental authorities” Williams referred to worked for Parker, whose office prosecuted Householder and Borges.
However, Parker last week sent a letter to the Public Utility Commission of Ohio asking the regulator to further postpone its investigation into the racketeering scandal.
“The PUCO proceedings involve issues related to the U.S. Department of Justice of the United States’ investigation, and the United States believes that continued discovery in the PUCO proceedings may directly interfere with or impede the United States’ ongoing investigation,” the letter said. “For that reason, the United States respectfully requests that PUCO stay the PUCO proceedings for a period of six months from the date of this letter. The United States reserves the right to request that the stay be extended beyond this time.”
Among those the feds may be investigating are Jones, Dowling and Sam Randazzo, whom Gov. Mike DeWine nominated to chair the PUCO in early 2019.
In a deferred prosecution agreement, FirstEnergy said it paid Randazzo a $4.3 million bribe just before his nomination in exchange for favors the ostensible regulator did for the company. Randazzo denies wrongdoing, but in the Householder trial, witnesses testified that Randazzo played a key role in drafting the corrupt bailout legislation.
Plaintiffs in the class-action suit earlier this month filed texts and emails between Jones, Dowling and Randazzo. They indicate that the three met in Randazzo’s Columbus condo in December 2018 and arranged to pay the soon-to-be regulator $4.3 million and made it clear that they expected something in return. They also appear to indicate that in addition to his work on the the bailout, Randazzo helped exempt FirstEnergy from a 2024 rate review it had been required to undergo.
The class-action plaintiffs are accusing FirstEnergy of violating securities law by concealing its illegal conduct from investors. Last week, they filed a transcript of an earnings call from July 23, 2020 — days after Householder, Borges and three others were arrested in the racketeering conspiracy. In it, Jones appeared to mislead analysts about his and his company’s role in it.
“I believe that FirstEnergy acted properly in this matter, and we intend to cooperate fully with the investigation to, among other things, ensure our company and our role in supporting House Bill 6 is understood as accurately as possible,” said Jones, who would be fired months later. “In the meantime, we wanted to share our preliminary perspective on this issue and reinforce the values with which we operate our company.”
Jones also claimed that he and his subordinates followed “the highest standards of conduct.”
“This is a serious and disturbing situation,” he said. “Ethical behavior and upholding the highest standards of conduct are foundational values for the entire FirstEnergy family and me personally. These high standards have fostered the trust of our employees, our customers and the financial community. We strive to apply these standards in all business dealings including our participation in the political process.”
Jones sat for a sworn deposition in the class-action case in July. Last week, U.S. Magistrate Judge Kimberly Jolson ordered Dowling to sit for one in October.
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.


rawstory--2020-01-16--Mike Pence ‘had to know’ what was going on with Ukraine: Lev Parnas

In his interview with MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow , Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas explained that there was no @ @ @ @ @ Pence couldn ’ t have known what was going on .
Toward the first part @ @ @ @ @ said that he and Giuliani were dangling Pence in front of the Ukraine president-elect at @ @ @ @ @ ’ s team said that they wanted some guests from the United States to attend @ @ @ @ @ said that they would send Pence , but Giuliani and Parnas said that it was @ @ @ @ @ condition of Zelensky announcing he intended to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his @ @ @ @ @ to Parnas , there was a threat by Giuliani that if they didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ U.S. officials would attend .
In a different part of the interview , Maddow asked @ @ @ @ @ was going on .
“ Pence went to Poland so he had to know about @ @ @ @ @ said .

At least one of those close to Trump has flipped. An un-indicted co-conspirator, known as Individual 20 in the indictment, was in the Oval Office when conversations occurred around getting data from the Georgia voting machines.
Speculation has run wild Tuesday about whether the 18 other defendants will flip on the former president to save themselves, or if Trump will throw the 18 under the bus.
"I think for Donald Trump, this indictment is particularly of interest because of the fact that he is one of 19 defendants," said NBC News reporter Vaughn Hillyard. "The conversation you guys were just having, for Donald Trump, he remains the — I guess, the head of this power apparatus that acts as a political party, but as Fani Willis alleges, is a criminal enterprise. For Donald Trump, there is a reality that those other 18 defendants are the most loyal of individuals after the 2020 election to him. But who among those individuals will Donald Trump throw off the cliff?"
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
He recalled seeing Trump in Iowa over the weekend and asking him whether he stands by the actions of his allies in the aftermath of the 2020 election, and Trump was already in self-protection mode.
"Part of his response to me was clear," Hillyard continued quoting Trump. "Many of the allies I don't know because, to be honest with you, I have so many allies. So, I don't know exactly what you're talking about."
Hillyard found it interesting that Trump was unwilling to say outright he has the back of anyone associated with working on his behalf.
"My question going forward is how many of these individuals will ultimately strike plea agreements with Fani Willis and undercut Donald Trump's own attempts at his own defense," he asked.
The former senior prosecutor for special counsel Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann, cited former chief of staff Mark Meadows, who has also been brought in under the federal trial.
"This is where Trump has to circle the wagons, and Mark Meadows is a really good example," he explained. "We know for a fact that he has now been indicted in the state case. What we don't know is what his status is in the federal case. It is possible that he was cooperating. If the indictment doesn't really look like sort of full cooperation, this is a possibility, it is possible he was immunized and sort of partially gave evidence, and it's possible he's not cooperating at all. Either way, at this point the state charges are — obviously this puts more pressure on Mark Meadows to fully cooperate."
He went on to call it the "biggest unknown" for any potential pressure special counsel Jack Smith or District Attorney Fani Willis will use in their respective cases to pressure Trump allies.
"Saying 'I did something wrong. I committed a crime,' just doesn't seem like something that would happen absent his being charged and absent real responsibility on his part, and I could see him having to plead guilty to something if he wanted to be that kind of cooperating witness," said Weissmann. "That is the biggest question I see here compared to all the other unindicted co-conspirators in the other case."
See the full conversation in the video below or at the link here.


rawstory--2020-01-16--Kellyanne Conway short-circuits as CNN’s Chris Cuomo starts stating facts about impeachment trial

On CNN Wednesday , Chris Cuomo tried to fact-check White House counselor Kellyanne Conway — and the exchange melted down as she began shouting over him .
“ These articles of impeachment are thin , they are specious , ” said Conway .
“ They ’ ve been presented to the Senate and we respect the process in the Senate .
The trial process will be much more familiar to Americans who know what a trial is.
” “ Let ’ s go one step at a time , Kellyanne , ” said Cuomo .
“ Not to get in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we need to focus on the present , but the way this went down , other than the fact that the House did the fact -inding , not a completely secret task force , as was the case for Clinton , as was the case for Nixon , the House did it .
When it came to what kind of rights and access the White House had , it was the same as Clinton had once it reached the House Judiciary.
” “ Hold on .
I ’ m not asking you to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ No one should have to call witnesses on their own behalf .
No one should have to provide a defense .
No one should have to prove their innocence .
What I ’ m saying is , I ’ ve never heard anybody hiding an alibi .
If I had somebody , if you had somebody who cleared you of a charge , you would bring them up .
Why ?
That ’ s in the interest of justice and it ’ s in your personal interest.
” “ Christopher , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s got to be a question lurking in there , ” complained Conway .
“ First of all , it is not the deep past would happen in the House .
The House rushed through the impeachment process , they didn ’ t do their job fully and completely .
And then they sat on the— ” “ They weren ’ t allowed because you hid witnesses and documents and even this information from [ Lev ] Parnas , ” said Cuomo .
“ They had to wait for federal prosecutors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s DOJ to release Parnas to give it.
” The exchange soon broke down , as Conway began to shout more insistently .
“ The Democrats wanted to get rid of Donald Trump , ” said Conway .
“ Here ’ s how y ’ all have been trying to do it .
First , you ’ re going to overturn the results of the election and find the electors , the 70,000 votes in the three states .
Then they ’ re going to — he ’ s not going to like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to go back to New York .
That was weird— ” “ This is all nonsense .
What I ’ m talking about is wrongdoing.
” said Cuomo .
“ Two years , recession — no , you ’ re embarrassed because you pushed that for years .
Then it ’ s recession , then it ’ s Ukraine .
Collusion , you pushed it for two years , ” continued Conway .
“ I was his campaign manager .
I was on CNN every day telling you how we would win @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a Russian .
we didn ’ t need the Russians.
” “ You didn ’ t .
Others did , ” said Cuomo .
“ You ’ ve got a guy looking at jail time right now .
You ’ ve got — too dumb to know they shouldn ’ t have done it .
they were doing dumb things.
” “ So you ’ re going back to Russia collusion , ” said Conway .
Conway also denied knowing Parnas , who appeared in this photo with her .

On CNN Wednesday, Chris Cuomo tried to fact-check White House counselor Kellyanne Conway — and the exchange melted down as she began shouting over him.
"These articles of impeachment are thin, they are specious," said Conway. "They've been presented to the Senate and we respect the process in the Senate. The trial process will be much more familiar to Americans who know what a trial is."
"Let's go one step at a time, Kellyanne," said Cuomo. "Not to get in the weeds of the past, because we need to focus on the present, but the way this went down, other than the fact that the House did the fact-finding, not a completely secret task force, as was the case for Clinton, as was the case for Nixon, the House did it. When it came to what kind of rights and access the White House had, it was the same as Clinton had once it reached the House Judiciary."
"You know what's different?" began Conway.
"Hold on. I'm not asking you to call witnesses," said Cuomo. "No one should have to call witnesses on their own behalf. No one should have to provide a defense. No one should have to prove their innocence. What I'm saying is, I've never heard anybody hiding an alibi. If I had somebody, if you had somebody who cleared you of a charge, you would bring them up. Why? That's in the interest of justice and it's in your personal interest."
"Christopher, you invited me on the show tonight and there's got to be a question lurking in there," complained Conway. "First of all, it is not the deep past would happen in the House. The House rushed through the impeachment process, they didn't do their job fully and completely. And then they sat on the—"
"They weren't allowed because you hid witnesses and documents and even this information from [Lev] Parnas," said Cuomo. "They had to wait for federal prosecutors under the jurisdiction of this president's DOJ to release Parnas to give it."
The exchange soon broke down, as Conway began to shout more insistently.
"The Democrats wanted to get rid of Donald Trump," said Conway. "Here's how y'all have been trying to do it. First, you're going to overturn the results of the election and find the electors, the 70,000 votes in the three states. Then they're going to — he's not going to like D.C., he's going to want to go back to New York. That was weird—"
"This is all nonsense. What I'm talking about is wrongdoing." said Cuomo.
"Two years, recession — no, you're embarrassed because you pushed that for years. Then it's recession, then it's Ukraine. Collusion, you pushed it for two years," continued Conway. "I was his campaign manager. I was on CNN every day telling you how we would win, so I would never have talked to a Russian. We didn't need the Russians."
"You didn't. Others did," said Cuomo. "You've got a guy looking at jail time right now. You've got — too dumb to know they shouldn't have done it. They were doing dumb things."
"So you're going back to Russia collusion," said Conway.
"You brought it up!" said Cuomo.
Conway also denied knowing Parnas, who appeared in this photo with her.
Watch below:


rawstory--2020-01-16--Giuliani told Parnas to ‘crank up the pressure on Ukraine’ for Biden investigation — or they’ll get

Giuliani told Parnas to ‘crank up the pressure on Ukraine’ for Biden investigation — or they’ll get ‘no aid’

Lev Parnas has already set President Donald Trump ’ s world on fire by releasing a dank stash of documents he acquired while working with Rudy Giuliani on an international conspiracy .
In an MSNBC interview Wednesday , Parnas told Rachel Maddow that Trump was very well aware of what was going on and he and Giuliani were the sign-offs on “ everything.
” But no information was as damning as the information that Parnas released Tuesday .
Not only did he confirm that the president authorized and ordered Giuliani ’ s off-the-books scheme in Ukraine , he proved the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Ukraine , as he once claimed .
Maddow has become an expert on Parnas and his associate Igor Fruman , who were the targets of her latest book , Blowout : Corrupted Democracy , Rogue State Russia , and the Richest , Most Destructive Industry on Earth , which was released Oct. 2019 .
She explained at the time that she never anticipated the subjects in her book would become such a critical piece of the president ’ s impeachment , she merely found the bizarre links fascinating and began to research @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maddow was expected to ask whether an exchange with Republican congressional candidate Robert Hyde really did have people tracking and following former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch , as he claimed on WhatsApp messages .
Parnas revealed that during phone calls between Rudy Giuliani and the president , Parnas was with Giuliani on the golf course .
Giuliani would then put the phone on speakerphone and Parnas could overhear what he was saying .
In one call , he explained that he heard Trump screaming at Giuliani because of something Giliuani did on television @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Giuliani instructed him to “ crank up the pressure on Ukraine ” to demand that they announce an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden .
If they didn ’ t abide by the “ threat , ” they would get “ no aid.
” Further , if he didn ’ t announce the investigation , then Vice President Mike Pence wouldn ’ t attend the Ukraine inauguration , and in fact , no U.S. officials would attend .
The following day , Pence announced he would not attend the inauguration .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Ukraine government , who ultimately disconnected their WhatsApp connection .
Giuliani told Parnas “ well , they ’ ll seem , ” meaning if they didn ’ t agree to Trump ’ s terms there would be repercussions .
Giuliani then told Parnas that the reason that Trump didn ’ t go to Poland where he was supposed to meet with the Ukrainian president was that the announcement hadn ’ t been made for the Biden investigation .
Trump canceled the trip saying it was because of the hurricane , but Parnas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to Giuliani .
Instead , John Bolton went to Poland on Trump ’ s behalf .
“ And he has a lot to say , ” Parnas said , noting he wouldn ’ t talk for Bolton , but that he would have a lot of information about the specifics .

Lev Parnas has already set President Donald Trump's world on fire by releasing a dank stash of documents he acquired while working with Rudy Giuliani on an international conspiracy. In an MSNBC interview Wednesday, Parnas told Rachel Maddow that Trump was very well aware of what was going on and he and Giuliani were the sign-offs on "everything."
But no information was as damning as the information that Parnas released Tuesday. Not only did he confirm that the president authorized and ordered Giuliani's off-the-books scheme in Ukraine, he proved the president didn't care about corruption in Ukraine, as he once claimed.
Maddow has become an expert on Parnas and his associate Igor Fruman, who were the targets of her latest book, Blowout: Corrupted Democracy, Rogue State Russia, and the Richest, Most Destructive Industry on Earth, which was released Oct. 2019. She explained at the time that she never anticipated the subjects in her book would become such a critical piece of the president's impeachment, she merely found the bizarre links fascinating and began to research the links.
During her interview, Maddow was expected to ask whether an exchange with Republican congressional candidate Robert Hyde really did have people tracking and following former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, as he claimed on WhatsApp messages.
Parnas revealed that during phone calls between Rudy Giuliani and the president, Parnas was with Giuliani on the golf course. Giuliani would then put the phone on speakerphone and Parnas could overhear what he was saying. In one call, he explained that he heard Trump screaming at Giuliani because of something Giliuani did on television.
While in Ukraine, Parnas said that Giuliani instructed him to "crank up the pressure on Ukraine" to demand that they announce an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden. If they didn't abide by the "threat," they would get "no aid." Further, if he didn't announce the investigation, then Vice President Mike Pence wouldn't attend the Ukraine inauguration, and in fact, no U.S. officials would attend.
The following day, Pence announced he would not attend the inauguration.
Parnas then messaged his contact person in the Ukraine government, who ultimately disconnected their WhatsApp connection. Giuliani told Parnas "well, they'll seem," meaning if they didn't agree to Trump's terms there would be repercussions.
Giuliani then told Parnas that the reason that Trump didn't go to Poland where he was supposed to meet with the Ukrainian president was that the announcement hadn't been made for the Biden investigation. Trump canceled the trip saying it was because of the hurricane, but Parnas said that wasn't the case, according to Giuliani.
Instead, John Bolton went to Poland on Trump's behalf. "And he has a lot to say," Parnas said, noting he wouldn't talk for Bolton, but that he would have a lot of information about the specifics.
Watch the videos below:


rawstory--2020-01-16--Republicans will never convict Trump — no matter how much more damning evidence comes out: MSNBC ana

Republicans will never convict Trump — no matter how much more damning evidence comes out: MSNBC analyst

Axios reporter and MSNBC analyst Jonathan Swan commented that there has been such a huge amount of documents that exposed President Donald Trump for an impeachable international conspiracy .
Swan explained that it won ’ t matter what is discovered , Senate Republicans won ’ t do anything to convict Trump .
MSNBC ’ s Chris Matthews mentioned the alleged “ tail ” on former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch to monitor her when overseas .
He asked how it is any different from the Watergate burglars attempting to wiretap the Democratic Party .
One major difference is that it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government through her official government-issued devices .
Joshua Geltzer , former national security council senior director for counterterrorism , told Matthews that it sums up Trump ’ s actions in one word : corruption because he using taxpayer resources for his own private gain .
“ Chris , we have photos , photographs , ” Swan said of the evidence Parnas released .
“ We don ’ t need new documents to know that Lev Parnas and Donald Trump had more than — there are photographs of the two of them next to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there .
This is why , okay , we ’ ve got this new trove of 700 things .
We basically know what happened .
We have the documentary history of this .
It ’ s all out there .
People are going to decide whether it ’ s impeachable or not .
From what I can tell , we ’ ve seen more signs of it , and I saw comments from Susan Collins today , they ’ re not going to vote to convict this guy .
They ’ re just @ @ @ @ @

Axios reporter and MSNBC analyst Jonathan Swan commented that there has been such a huge amount of documents that exposed President Donald Trump for an impeachable international conspiracy. Swan explained that it won't matter what is discovered, Senate Republicans won't do anything to convict Trump.
MSNBC's Chris Matthews mentioned the alleged "tail" on former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch to monitor her when overseas. He asked how it is any different from the Watergate burglars attempting to wiretap the Democratic Party. One major difference is that it was monitoring a member of the United States government through her official government-issued devices.
Joshua Geltzer, former national security council senior director for counterterrorism, told Matthews that it sums up Trump's actions in one word: corruption because he using taxpayer resources for his own private gain.
"Chris, we have photos, photographs," Swan said of the evidence Parnas released. "We don't need new documents to know that Lev Parnas and Donald Trump had more than — there are photographs of the two of them next to each other! This is all out there. This is why, okay, we've got this new trove of 700 things. We basically know what happened. We have the documentary history of this. It's all out there. People are going to decide whether it's impeachable or not. From what I can tell, we've seen more signs of it, and I saw comments from Susan Collins today, they're not going to vote to convict this guy. They're just not going to."
Watch below:


rawstory--2020-01-16--Jerry Nadler smacks down GOP demands to call Hunter Biden: He knows ‘nothing about’ Trump’s miscondu

Jerry Nadler smacks down GOP demands to call Hunter Biden: He knows ‘nothing about’ Trump’s misconduct

With pressure mounting by the day to call witnesses like former National Security Adviser John Bolton and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney , some Senate Republicans are floating the idea that they should be allowed , provided President Donald Trump gets to call Hunter Biden to the stand and use him as a punching bag for his conspiracy theories .
On CNN Wednesday , House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler ( D-NY ) , one of the impeachment “ managers ” who will deliver the House ’ s case in the Senate trial , offered a simple explanation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense .
“ Are you preparing to deal with Hunter Biden as a witness ?
” asked host Erin Burnett .
“ No , Hunter Biden should not be a witness because you only have witnesses who are relevant , ” said Nadler .
“ That is to say , the president is accused of certain crimes , high crimes and misdemeanors .
If someone has evidence , pro or con , as to whether he committed those crimes , high crimes and misdemeanors , he ’ s relevant .
Hunter Biden has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allegations against the president .
Some of the Republicans urging that he be called are simply trying to confuse the issue and to throw a red herring in it .
If someone is accused of a bank robbery , the relevant witnesses are people who know , who can say he did or didn ’ t rob the bank , not someone who knows nothing about that .
”

With pressure mounting by the day to call witnesses like former National Security Adviser John Bolton and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, some Senate Republicans are floating the idea that they should be allowed, provided President Donald Trump gets to call Hunter Biden to the stand and use him as a punching bag for his conspiracy theories.
On CNN Wednesday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), one of the impeachment "managers" who will deliver the House's case in the Senate trial, offered a simple explanation why this would not make any legal sense.
"Are you preparing to deal with Hunter Biden as a witness?" asked host Erin Burnett.
"No, Hunter Biden should not be a witness because you only have witnesses who are relevant," said Nadler. "That is to say, the president is accused of certain crimes, high crimes and misdemeanors. If someone has evidence, pro or con, as to whether he committed those crimes, high crimes and misdemeanors, he's relevant. Hunter Biden has no way of knowing anything about the allegations against the president. Some of the Republicans urging that he be called are simply trying to confuse the issue and to throw a red herring in it. If someone is accused of a bank robbery, the relevant witnesses are people who know, who can say he did or didn't rob the bank, not someone who knows nothing about that."
Watch below:


rawstory--2020-01-16--‘It was all about Biden — it was never about corruption’: Lev Parnas tells MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow

President Donald Trump said that the reason he was so interested in former Vice President Joe Biden and his son was because of potential corruption in Ukraine .
As Lev Parnas ’ documents show , that ’ s far from the case .
Among the dirty-laundry bag of documents , was a letter from Trump ’ s lawyer Rudy Giuliani to leaders in Ukraine trying to get a meeting .
Giuliani explained that he was working with the express cooperation and authorization from the president , but in a personal capacity .
Had Giuliani been working to fix corruption in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it as an official task of the United States along with international partners .
It was in that capacity that Biden told Ukraine they wouldn ’ t get aide if they didn ’ t fix their corruption problem .
According to Parnas , who was interviewed by MSNBC host Rachel Maddow Wednesday , the efforts were never about corruption .
“ It was all about Joe Biden , Hunter Biden and also Rudy had a personal thing with the [ Paul ] Manafort stuff , the black ledger , ” Parnas said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ looking into .
But it was never about corruption .
It was never — it was strictly about Burisma which included Hunter Biden and Joe Biden .
”


rawstory--2020-01-16--Trump mega-donors can now contribute nearly $600,000 to get him reelected

Under an agreement announced Wednesday , the Trump Victory super PAC can score $ 580,000 from mega-donors for his reelection .
The Republican National Committee ’ s biggest donors could also end up contributing as much as $ 1.6 million earmarked for Trump ’ s reelection in 2020 .
A Washington Post analysis revealed the new numbers Wednesday that these astoundly large numbers are all thanks to the Supreme Court ’ s 2014 campaign finance ruling , McCutcheon v. FEC .
Thanks to the invention of super PACs , a loophole was created giving unaffiliated political groups supporting candidates the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaigns from the ultra-wealthy or corporations .
The new rule Trump is taking advantage of allows for large sums to be raised in conjunction with political party committees .
Because the Democrats do not have a presidential nominee , they can ’ t raise this money .
So , it puts Trump at a significant advantage .
“ It is the latest example of the dramatically expanding fundraising power of national party committees , made possible through pivotal legal changes in 2014 that loosened restrictions on individual contributions .
While a person can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s campaign committee , a donor can legally give 103 times more in support of Trump ’ s reelection through the new joint fundraising arrangement , ” the Post reported .
“ These joint committees have allowed presidential candidates to collect massive sums from their party ’ s top donors .
The Hillary Victory Fund raised $ 530 million in 2015 and 2016 , federal filings show , ” said the Post .
Trump has far surpassed that number in 2020 with a year to go before the election .
Read @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Under an agreement announced Wednesday, the Trump Victory super PAC can score $580,000 from mega-donors for his reelection. The Republican National Committee's biggest donors could also end up contributing as much as $1.6 million earmarked for Trump's reelection in 2020.
A Washington Post analysis revealed the new numbers Wednesday that these astoundly large numbers are all thanks to the Supreme Court's 2014 campaign finance ruling, McCutcheon v. FEC.
Thanks to the invention of super PACs, a loophole was created giving unaffiliated political groups supporting candidates the ability to raise buckets of cash for campaigns from the ultra-wealthy or corporations. The new rule Trump is taking advantage of allows for large sums to be raised in conjunction with political party committees. Because the Democrats do not have a presidential nominee, they can't raise this money. So, it puts Trump at a significant advantage.
"It is the latest example of the dramatically expanding fundraising power of national party committees, made possible through pivotal legal changes in 2014 that loosened restrictions on individual contributions. While a person can give a maximum of $5,600 to Trump’s campaign committee, a donor can legally give 103 times more in support of Trump’s reelection through the new joint fundraising arrangement," the Post reported.
"These joint committees have allowed presidential candidates to collect massive sums from their party’s top donors. The Hillary Victory Fund raised $530 million in 2015 and 2016, federal filings show," said the Post. Trump has far surpassed that number in 2020 with a year to go before the election.
Read the full report at the Washington Post.


rawstory--2020-01-16--‘We’re determined to find out’ the origins of the ‘deeply disturbing’ threats against the Ukraine am

‘We’re determined to find out’ the origins of the ‘deeply disturbing’ threats against the Ukraine ambassador: Adam Schiff

On CNN Wednesday , House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) told anchor Wolf Blitzer that he and @ @ @ @ @ look into the “ implicit or potential threats ” to U.S .
Ambassador to the @ @ @ @ @ I have to say it ’ s deeply disturbing to see that it looks like @ @ @ @ @ surveillance , ” said Schiff .
“ There were implicit or potential threats to the @ @ @ @ @ t know where those originated or the explanation for them , but we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ The documents turned over to House Democrats by indicted Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas appears @ @ @ @ @ aligned with the president were tracking Yovanovitch , and text messages describe threatening messages about @ @

On CNN Wednesday, House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) told anchor Wolf Blitzer that he and his fellow lawmakers intend to look into the "implicit or potential threats" to U.S. Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.
"I have to say it's deeply disturbing to see that it looks like someone had the ambassador under surveillance," said Schiff. "There were implicit or potential threats to the ambassador. We don't know where those originated or the explanation for them, but we're determined to find out."
The documents turned over to House Democrats by indicted Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas appears to indicate that private actors aligned with the president were tracking Yovanovitch, and text messages describe threatening messages about her.
Watch below:


rawstory--2020-01-17--Trump scalded for adding Dershowitz and Starr to impeachment team: ‘Invite clowns — expect a circus’

President Donald Trump raised eyebrows by adding attorneys Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr to his impeachment defense team .
Starr @ @ @ @ @ Bill Clinton ’ s impeachment , and both attorneys helped late financier Jeffrey Epstein secure @ @ @ @ @ battled dozens of sex abuse claims by teenage girls .
Dershowitz has been accused of @ @ @ @ @ Epstein ’ s victims , and Starr was ousted as president of Baylor University in @ @ @ @ @ his handling of sexual assault claims against football players .
Former Florida attorney general Pam @ @ @ @ @ investigation into Trump University in 2013 after receiving a campaign donation from the future president @ @ @ @ @ also join the team .

Trump pointed out that a state judge prohibited her from continuing that investigation.
Jones, who has been implicated in the plot to stop the certification of Georgia's results, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Trump indictment, but remains under investigation separately by the Prosecuting Attorneys Council of Georgia, which may lead to the appointment of a special counsel.
Trump's email, that had the subject line "The Truth About Fani Willis," repeated previous claims that she had a relationship with a suspected gang member and that "She Is The Daughter Of A Former Black Panther."
And he said that, "On The Eve Of Her Anticipated Indictment Of President Trump, Willis Launched Her New 2023 Re-Election Campaign Website To Take Maximum Advantage Of Her New-found Fame," and accused Willis of leaking a charging sheet against Trump before the grand jury had even voted to "taint the jury pool."
The Fulton County Clerk put out a statement Tuesday that attempted to explain how a document listing charges against Trump was accidentally uploaded to the docket before the jury had even voted.
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
The indictment in Georgia follows three other sets of criminal charges against Trump in other jurisdictions, including another election subversion case in Washington, D.C. brought by special counsel Jack Smith, a federal Espionage Act case brought by Smith in South Florida, and a business records fraud case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
The Georgia case also outlines charges against 18 other people, including several attorneys who advised Trump, and David Shafer, the chair of the Georgia Republican Party.
Read the email here.


rawstory--2020-01-17--Lara Trump mocks Joe Biden’s speech impediment at ‘Women for Trump’ event: ‘Let’s get the words out

Lara Trump mocks Joe Biden’s speech impediment at ‘Women for Trump’ event: ‘Let’s get the words out Joe’

During a “ Women for Trump ” event in Iowa this Thursday , President Trump ’ s daughter-in-law , Lara Trump , seemingly mocked Joe Biden ’ s speech impediment and suggested the Democrats are in big trouble having him as a front runner in the 2020 election .
“ Every time he comes on stage and they turn to him , I ’ m like , Joe can you get it out , let ’ s get the words out , Joe , ” Trump said .
“ You kinda feel bad for him.
” According to Trump , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s son Eric , Biden ’ s frontrunner status is a result of the Democrats being “ desperate.
” “ That is why they have tried since the day he came down the escalator to stop Donald Trump , ” she said , referencing the 2015 moment when Donald Trump descended the Trump Tower escalator to announce his candidacy .
Biden ’ s struggles with speech are well known , and he ’ s had the issue since he was a child .
He described his experiences with having a speech impediment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump make her comments about Biden in the video below :

During a "Women for Trump" event in Iowa this Thursday, President Trump's daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, seemingly mocked Joe Biden's speech impediment and suggested the Democrats are in big trouble having him as a front runner in the 2020 election.
"Every time he comes on stage and they turn to him, I'm like, Joe can you get it out, let's get the words out, Joe," Trump said. "You kinda feel bad for him."
According to Trump, who is the wife of President Trump's son Eric, Biden's frontrunner status is a result of the Democrats being "desperate."
"That is why they have tried since the day he came down the escalator to stop Donald Trump," she said, referencing the 2015 moment when Donald Trump descended the Trump Tower escalator to announce his candidacy.
Biden's struggles with speech are well known, and he's had the issue since he was a child. He described his experiences with having a speech impediment to The Atlantic recently.
Watch Lara Trump make her comments about Biden in the video below:
&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffpost.com%2Fentry%2Flara-trump-joe-biden-stutter_n_5e214584c5b674e44b958b73


rawstory--2020-01-17--Jeffrey Epstein’s former defense lawyer will defend Trump on the Senate floor

America ’ s most famous celebrity attorney , Alan Dershowitz , said Friday he would be part of the legal team defending President Donald Trump in his Senate impeachment trial .
According to US media reports , another high-profile member of the team will be Ken Starr , the special prosecutor in the 1988 Bill Clinton impeachment .
Starr is a hero to many on the right , even if Clinton ultimately was acquitted in the Senate .
“ Professor Dershowitz will present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ account .
“ He believes the issues at stake go to the heart of our enduring Constitution.
” With past clients including convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein , O.J .
Simpson , film director Roman Polanski and Mike Tyson , Dershowitz is probably the best known lawyer to the stars in the United States .
He will be part of a team with serious firepower headed by the White House ’ s discreet but uncompromising counsel Pat Cipollone .
Trump , a Republican , is accused of abusing his office by pressuring Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election rival Joe Biden .
Cipollone is behind the White House ’ s strategy of refusing to cooperate with Democratic investigators throughout the impeachment probe .
The White House has yet to announce the full team but confirms that Cipollone will be the lead lawyer , backed by Trump attorney Jay Sekulow .

America's most famous celebrity attorney, Alan Dershowitz, said Friday he would be part of the legal team defending President Donald Trump in his Senate impeachment trial.
According to US media reports, another high-profile member of the team will be Ken Starr, the special prosecutor in the 1988 Bill Clinton impeachment.
Starr is a hero to many on the right, even if Clinton ultimately was acquitted in the Senate.
"Professor Dershowitz will present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal," said a statement on his personal Twitter account.
"He believes the issues at stake go to the heart of our enduring Constitution."
With past clients including convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, O.J. Simpson, film director Roman Polanski and Mike Tyson, Dershowitz is probably the best known lawyer to the stars in the United States.
He will be part of a team with serious firepower headed by the White House's discreet but uncompromising counsel Pat Cipollone.
Trump, a Republican, is accused of abusing his office by pressuring Ukraine to dig up dirt on a Democratic election rival Joe Biden.
Cipollone is behind the White House's strategy of refusing to cooperate with Democratic investigators throughout the impeachment probe.
The White House has yet to announce the full team but confirms that Cipollone will be the lead lawyer, backed by Trump attorney Jay Sekulow.


rawstory--2020-01-17--Lev Parnas flipped after feeling betrayed by Trump associates: ‘Felt like my family left me’

Lev Parnas felt betrayed after the husband-and-wife legal team Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing remained silent about their relationship to him .
The Ukraine-born associate of President Donald Trump ’ s attorney Rudy Giuliani was arrested in October on campaign finance violation charges , and he was hurt that Giuliani and the couple did not speak up to defend him , reported The Daily Beast .
“ I felt like my family left me , ” Parnas told the website .
All three frequently appear on Fox News to defend controversial clients and allies , but Parnas was stung by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me , knowing that this was probably a hit job , they all just clammed up , ” he said .
That betrayal helped Parnas decide to come forward with documents , photos and other evidence related to his efforts on behalf of Trump and Giuliani to pressure the Ukrainian government to announce an investigation — which eventually led to the president ’ s impeachment .
Lawyers connected to Trump initially latched onto Parnas after his arrest , but he told MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow that he “ fired ” them because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me quiet .
”

Hunter Biden had a plea deal in place with prosecutors, but the arrangement fell apart late last month after a federal judge raised concerns about terms of the agreement.
“We didn't know that was going to happen,” Lowell said, adding that “given what's been happening in the case, it wasn't a surprise that there would be some announcement to see where this case and the investigation would go from here.”
But Lowell insisted that the appointment shouldn’t change anything about his client’s legal jeopardy.
“Here's what people should focus on, Kaitlan, that what happened today, as a practical matter, is not much different than what was the case yesterday, or three weeks from before,” Lowell said.
“The attorney general and Mr. Weiss have both has said for weeks, months, that he had all the authority he needed to bring any charge that was merited, at any time that was appropriate, in any place that made sense, and so the power that a special counsel has, is the power that he has had.”
Lowell said the only change in the case is Weiss’ new title.
“His powers were the same yesterday. So what's different?” Lowell said. “It doesn't make any difference to us, given what we understood to be the case. Once again, people need to understand that the attorney general and he that he, Mr. Weiss, has said for a long time, that he had all the authority that he needed to bring any charge that was appropriate in any place.
“So what does the special counsel do that he couldn't do? The answer should be nothing different as to why now or why he wanted this as of last Tuesday. That's a question you're gonna have to ask him. But from our point of view, it should not change the outcome."
OTHER NEWS: Trump's lawyer in damage control to walk back his client's comments: legal analyst
He added:
“Who could say that they have been the subject of such a painstaking investigation, looking at every nook and cranny in which a conclusion was two tax misdemeanors and a diverted gun case to turn into anything else. There's been no evidence or fact that wasn't uncovered a week ago, that will be uncovered tomorrow.”
Watch the video below or at the link here.


rawstory--2020-01-17--WATCH: Cop goes viral after calmly shutting down Trump-loving ‘Gun Girl’ with some simple logic

Kaitlin Bennett is a right-wing pro-gun , pro-Trump activist who first came to fame when her college graduation photos showing her sporting an assault rifle went viral .
Now she ’ s going viral again , but this time it ’ s due to her less-than-persuasive interview skills .
Bennett conducts interviews for Liberty Hangout , a self-described “ libertarian media outlet ” that publishes weekly videos online .
Last year , she took her mic and InfoWars camera crew to an LGBT+ Pride event in Des Moines and an interview she conducted with a police officer is getting some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complained about Bennett , prompting the officer to tell her and her camera crew to leave people alone .
Bennett protested , but it was the cop ’ s straightforward and logical demeanor that ’ s making the clip so popular .
“ You clearly don ’ t like what they ’ re up to , ” the officer sternly said , after Bennett protested the complaints .
“ Then go away , ” the officer replied , “ There ’ s no reason to interview anyone.
” Bennett , who is famous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ college kids about various aspects of the liberal agenda , accused the cop of making “ accusations ” when he ’ s supposed to be standing up for “ the truth.
” “ I ’ m not any making accusations other than what I believe is taking place here , ” the cop said .

And the alleged perpetrators in both counties are facing felony charges.
The similarity of events in Mesa County and Coffee County were of particular interest to Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who has been vocal about the need for vigilance against “insider threats” to election systems. In response to the Georgia indictment, Griswold said such threats, as the nation heads into a new election year in which Trump is the leading GOP candidate for president, remain active.
“I strongly believe Coloradans and Americans deserve and need to know ongoing attempts to steal elections,” Griswold told Colorado Newsline.
The Georgia indictment, which came from a Fulton County grand jury, charged Trump and 18 members of his inner circle on 41 counts. Two defendants with Colorado ties are named in the indictment — Trump attorneys John Eastman, who at the time of the alleged criminal activity was a visiting scholar at the University of Colorado Boulder and currently represents the Colorado Republican Party in a lawsuit against Griswold, and Jenna Ellis, who until recently lived in Colorado and, though she was censured this year over election falsehoods, remains licensed to practice law in the state.
The indictment, which charges each of the defendants with racketeering, among other counts, says that after Trump lost the election the defendants “refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.”
Part of that alleged conspiracy involved Misty Hampton, who in 2020 was the Coffee County elections supervisor. Starting on Jan. 7, 2021 — the day after the Jan. 6 insurrection — Hampton, Trump lawyer Sidney Powell and other co-conspirators broke into the county’s Dominion machines and improperly accessed voter data, according to the indictment. Hampton “allowed” co-conspirators into private areas of the elections office.
About four months later, then-Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters committed an almost identical criminal act, according to prosecutors. The Republican clerk allegedly allowed digital copies of the Mesa County election system server’s software and other sensitive information to be made and disseminated. The case against Peters began with an investigation by Griswold’s office.
Though different people are thought to have been involved in the Colorado and Georgia security breaches, the sweeping indictment out of Fulton County speaks of a wide-ranging conspiracy that involved alleged criminal acts “in other states” and 30 unindicted unnamed co-conspirators. Griswold noted that the breaches occurred as part of national election-denial efforts by figures such as MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell and former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne, both of whom have ties to Peters. Byrne in a video appeared to acknowledge his own involvement in the Mesa County case.
“Make no mistake, there was a national conspiracy to breach Mesa County’s voting equipment. That has always been very clear. Patrick Byrne admitted his complicity on a video and posted it to Twitter,” Griswold said.
Asked if the Fulton County indictment had any bearing on the Peters case, which does not involve the kind of far-ranging racketeering charges brought in Georgia, Mesa County District Attorney Dan Rubinstein, whose office is prosecuting the case against Peters, wrote in a text, “We will not be amending our charges, as we want to avoid any further delays and are eager to get our case before a jury.”
Peters did not respond to a text seeking comment.
The parties are due in early September to establish a trial date.
Elbert County was also the site of an election system security breach facilitated by the county’s own top election official. In that case, Colorado election denier Shawn Smith, who was part of the Trump mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and works on “election integrity” efforts for the Lindell-funded Cause of America, helped then-Clerk Dalls Schroeder, a Republican, copy sensitive voter information.
Similar security breaches also occurred in three Michigan counties.
Griswold, a Democrat, said such breaches don’t alter election outcomes. But they serve other purposes, such as spreading disinformation.
“I’m absolutely concerned,” Griswold said. “The purpose of the ‘big lie’ is to create chaos, and chaos is definitely part of local election administrators trying to undermine the election process from within. I am increasingly concerned all across the nation about insider threats.”
Colorado has taken steps, such as passage of Griswold-backed protections against “insider threats,” that put the state in a better position to maintain election security, she said.


rawstory--2020-01-17--Trump picks Fox News lawyers Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr to defend him during impeachment: CNN

President Donald Trump has added some new names to his legal defense team for his impeachment trial — and all @ @ @ @ @ News contributors .
According to CNN ’ s Kaitlan Collins , “ Ken Starr , @ @ @ @ @ are all expected to join President Trump ’ s legal team ” ahead of his @ @ @ @ @ Collins , Dershowitz is expected to speak before the United States Senate “ to address @ @ @ @ @ and removal.
” Starr is best known for serving as the special prosecutor whose report @ @ @ @ @ former President Bill Clinton in the 1990s .
Dershowitz , meanwhile , has become infamous @ @ @ @ @ past work representing accused billionaire child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein , who was a longtime @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
All three of the men tapped by the president regularly offer legal analysis @ @ @ @ @ have all claimed that the case against the president does not meet the threshold for @ @ @ @ @

President Donald Trump has added some new names to his legal defense team for his impeachment trial -- and all of them make frequent appearances on Fox News.
According to CNN's Kaitlan Collins, "Ken Starr, Alan Dershowitz and Robert Ray are all expected to join President Trump’s legal team" ahead of his Senate trial.
According to Collins, Dershowitz is expected to speak before the United States Senate "to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal."
Starr is best known for serving as the special prosecutor whose report led to the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton in the 1990s. Dershowitz, meanwhile, has become infamous in recent months for his past work representing accused billionaire child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who was a longtime friend of both Clinton and Trump.
All three of the men tapped by the president regularly offer legal analysis on Fox News and they have all claimed that the case against the president does not meet the threshold for removing him from office.