I don't watch TV so I don't know what I missed on Rachel but DU is making it sound epic

[Quixote1818]

I am skeptical because I have gone to CNN, and other news networks and they hardly covering any of this. Most are leading with the Warren / Sanders feud. Can someone fill me in on why all this is so earth moving if the other networks are hardly touching it?

[marble falls]

1. He directly ties Trump to the quid pro quo.

[NCLefty]

3. *with a piece of paper that could have been written at any time

And he's not under oath on Rachel Maddow.

Also, Trump is already impeached for the quid pro quo, and Senate Republicans aren't still going to try to let him off for that. No one is investigating the quid pro quo stuff for criminality. So I don't know what that piece of paper changes.

[marble falls]

8. He was there, he's an eye witness, he talked to and heard from all of them ...

including the Orange Shitgibbon.

[NCLefty]

16. He's nothing until he says it under oath.

[Eyeball_Kid]

10. Parnas adds to the evidence with corroboration. That's what's important. But there's more

than just a piece of paper, and I think you know it (or you're not paying close attention). There's his allegation that Pence is just as dirty as Giuliani, and that Barr and Pompeo are just as dirty as Pence. His statements beg for trial witnesses to corroborate or contradict. Also, Parnas corroborates the testimony of others when describing the sequence of events that led to Pence's cancellation of his trip to Ukraine.

Parnas WILL have to give testimony under oath within a number of scenarios. His entry into the whole drama is new, so we should expect the institutions to catch up to the news quite soon, but it's never immediate.

[NCLefty]

17. The allegations of Pence & others also need to be corroborated. But...

Do you suppose Mitch will be allowing those people to testify in the senate sham trial? I'm just not sure we're going to get what a lot of us seem to think we're going to out of this. We've all been burned before. See: Mueller. We were good little soldiers and waited and waited and waited... bunk.

I don't like to get my hopes up and have them dashed and we DO have a lot of people here who think you can be locked up for things that aren't even crimes (or that we don't have any solid evidence for). I guess we have that in common with Republicans. :/

[NCLefty]

2. It's a lot of potential evidence with a lot of potential trouble, and maybe a crime or 8 somewhere,

But we don't know who is going to investigate, let alone prosecute anything here yet.

[lunatica]

4. CNN might cover it now and tomorrow

The actual interview with Rachel was just a couple of hours ago.

You might be able to get it online if you go google Rachel Maddow or MSNBC. It’s hard to summarize because there was so much in it. Rachel was very thorough in asking questions and let him talk a lot.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. It's definitely epic. Since MSNBC carried the interview it figures that they'd be featuring it

on their subsequent programs. They're talking about it now on CNN.

[unc70]

6. CNN will change tune after their Parnas interview airs

Tonight, it is essentially an MSNBC scoop relying on their due diligence and interview. Other media will start chiming in overnight (WAPO, NYT, etc.) followed by other TV. CNN will mostly avoid this topic until it can tease its own AC interview and air it, probably Thursday night.

[Hekate]

7. Other stations don't have it yet because this is Rachel's scoop, something she worked on for months

Last edited Thu Jan 16, 2020, 01:34 AM - Edit history (1)

She very quietly and diligently worked to get Lev Parnas and his lawyer to sit with her for a 2-hour interview, and they finally did. Lawyer said nothing, but Lev said everything.

Lev gave a pile of papers and cell phone records to Pelosi recently, and now he is talking to Rachel like there's no tomorrow. Names, dates, activities, connections, who talked with him, phone records and written material, what they tasked him with, what he overheard because Trump yells into his phone, exact details.

He's a thug and a fixer and it turns out that from Trump on down our government is run by thugs. I mean we knew that, but here is evidence. Really: connections laid out to Trump, Pence, Pompeo, and all the rest. Oh yes, Nunes and his aide. And Barr.

The Ukraine scheme? Trump was directing and others were up to their eyeballs in it.

You'll have to wait for the other stations and the newspapers to catch up, but Rachel Maddow got it first, and I think deserves a Pulitzer Prize.

[Mersky]

9. Can catch the podcasts

Is what I’ve done in the past as a cord cutter. There’s a half hour video podcast and a full hour audio one.

[intrepidity]

11. NYT also has an interview w Parnas posted now

One of the big takeaways is the role of Lutsenko (at the time, AG Ukraine). There was a quid pro quo with him, that he would dig dirt on Biden in exchange for removal of his critic Amb Yovanovitch. We suspected this, of course, but it is spelled out clearly in messages.

[manhattan123]

12. Just curious...

If you don't watch TV but you heard about an interview by Rachel Maddow, why would you go to CNN and not MSNBC?

[leftstreet]

14. I think the poster wondered if other networks covered it

I wondered the same thing when I saw the threads here

[peggysue2]

13. It was truly epic

And disturbing in so many ways. We have a mobster sitting in the White House, one who has had a lot of help in tearing down the institutions we've always taken for granted. Parnas implicated the entire Trump leadership team with more to come tomorrow. It's devastating. And heartbreaking to realize how extensive the web of corruption is, how many were willing to sell their souls for money, for influence, for power.

Putin must be very proud.

[avebury]

15. I would recommend listening to the

podcast of last night's show. There are lots of podcast apps.