Parnas' attorney just blew it all up...implicated Barr, Pence, Graham, Pompeo, Perry and others

[brush]

Breaking now

[Kingofalldems]

1. Here:

Link to tweet

[TheBlackAdder]

17. He better start putting out some sworn affidavits, just in case.

[rzemanfl]

2. Check your spelling.

n/t

[True Blue American]

4. Who cares about

A few typo’s?

What was posted was important. I knew Schumer was furious. Did not know why.

[rzemanfl]

9. Apparently Brush does.

[True Blue American]

10. But with the information in the TP

Not mentioned at all.

[rzemanfl]

11. When I see TP on the shopping list I know what to buy.

What do you mean?

[EndlessWire]

31. Trump Party. n/t

[rzemanfl]

32. There's a difference? Thanks, but it doesn't fit the context in the reply very well. n/t

[PA Democrat]

3. Nunes, Toensing, diGenova also.

He claims he has the receipts to prove it. Phone records, documents, etc.

[True Blue American]

5. Now the truth begins.

Schiff can subpoena each one.

[AlexSFCA]

19. doesn't need to - he dump it online

preemtive strike

[crickets]

7. Documents! Get yer documents here!

Lev may be a slimeball, but right now he's a slimeball getting the job done to blow the lid off this thing.

[awesomerwb1]

6. I hope they have good security

Under normal circumstances this would be shockingly HUGE.

Under trump/Barr rule? Huge-ish?

[procon]

8. How in the world can we officially investigate and indict so many

top tier criminals? Barr and Justice is as corrupt as Trump, so how does it start, can the House have a special prosecutor?

The utter ignorance, or maybe it's hubris, of all these people is just astounding. They all clearly thought they would get away with everything, maybe slip away with a little Russian or Ukrainian cash, and there would be no blowback on them. They probably believed Trump who told them it would be the "perfect" crime and he would protect them. Lotta hand wringing going on in the RNC right now.

[jalan48]

12. Can you imagine how powerful this would have been if it was being recited before the House

Impeachment Inquiry. Why did the Democrats end it before this type of info came out (Bolton as well?

[gratuitous]

21. Parnas' information was bottled up by the judge in his criminal case

Parnas' documents seized by the government in his criminal case were sealed by the court. Parnas petitioned the court to release his documents on (near as I can tell) December 2, 2019. The court didn't release Parnas' documents in time to be included in the impeachment inquiry, but shortly after the articles were passed and referred to the Senate. I don't know if the court delayed releasing Parnas' documents until it would be too late, or if the timing was coincidental or what.

As for Bolton, he had his information all along so he could write his book. I don't know what hi$ motivation might have been for keeping quiet all thi$ time.

[jalan48]

22. I get that neither Parnas or Bolton were ready to testify when the House closed its inquiry. I

don't understand why we didn't wait knowing more damaging information was still out there. What was the hurry?

[gratuitous]

27. No guarantees

There were no guarantees that Parnas' material would be released by the court and he could then turn it over to the House leadership. What it was and how damaging it might be to the president was speculative, not anything for sure. Even at that, it's difficult to say how credible a reporter Parnas is. He is certainly telling a damning tale against Trump, and seems to have documentary back-up for a lot of it. Parnas has also volunteered his willingness to testify under oath, which Trump and his minions refuse to consider.

As far as the Bolton material goes, Bolton kept mum throughout the impeachment inquiry, and considering the general lack of cooperation from White House sources, it wasn't a leap to think that Bolton's silence signaled that he wouldn't cooperate with any House overtures to testify. If Bolton had let the House know he was available and ready to testify, they probably would have called him.

In any case, the House seemed focused on the two articles they passed and referred to the Senate, and they went with the testimony and documentation they had, not what they wished they had. As it is, a lot of Senate Republicans agree that the House presented a compelling case to prove the articles; they just don't seem inclined to remove Trump from the presidency, no matter how many skeletons come clattering out of the various closets.

[jalan48]

29. Yes, there were no certainties. I'm sure our strategy will be debated in the years to come.

[at140]

28. I agree, Bolton, Mulvaney, Parnas, etc should have been suboenaed by

chairman Schiff's committee. The courts would have agreed because there was no justifiable reason to deny them to appear as witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the Ukraine affair. What was the hurry to send articles of impeachment without critical evidence? Election was 11 months away and there was ample time to expose corruption of Trump gang.

[jalan48]

30. Yes eleven months is a long time for Trump to have the pressure of impeachment hanging over him.

It will be over soon and we will be on to the next outrage.

[brush]

35. repug courts-judges control tne process, they could drag it out until after the election.

[brush]

34. repug courts-judges control tne process, they could drag it out until after the election.

Did you want to take that chance?

[jalan48]

36. We were in control. We could stop the process anytime we wanted. Judges didn't control that.

We'll never know since we stopped the process.

[brush]

38. Courts-repug judges control how promptly they rule on subpoeas.

[jalan48]

39. And the Republicans also control the Presidency and the Senate. All we control is the House.

[brush]

44. Yes, courts could old up ruling on subpoeas until after the election and then who would care?

[lastlib]

23. I REALLY wish now Nancy had held back that first Article.....

That would make McConnell either hold TWO trials, or wait for first--all the while all this shit was coming out.....maybe this is the one strategic error she has made...?

[jalan48]

25. I don't know why they closed it when they did. It seems it would have been better to wait awhile and

see how the subpoenas played out in the courts at least. To me, the big advantage of being in control of the process outweighed the need to rush.

[brush]

33. nah, repug courts-judges control the process, they could drag it out until after the election.

[Volaris]

40. Because now that the Senate has all but voted to crown themselves a goddamn KING,

this can cost McConnell his precious fucking Majority in November.

And as a consequence, even IF trump is re-selected, he can go ahead and get himself impeached again, and THEN he will be convicted, removed, indicted, and die in prison.

[jalan48]

42. That's what we have left. I hope it happens but then I thought Mueller would get Trump.

[Volaris]

43. Mueller was never gonna push beyond his conservative background too hard..

I think he didnt wanna be the next Ken Starr, if that makes sense?

His concept seems to be more of an old-school conservativiam...meaning he would do his job, and then the House AND SENATE would do theirs.

Thay was a misjudgment on his part, but not necessarily one that I hold against him.

[rurallib]

13. If Bolton had a smidge of a brain he would follow suit

and get his info out in the public before it becomes really important that he be shut up.

[TheBlackAdder]

16. If folks are running Political Dead Pools, perhaps it's time to recalculate who will be next! 🤔

.



.

[Still In Wisconsin]

14. Won't matter. All Trump has to do is say "Yeah we did all that, in the best interest of America."

With the new Dershowitz precedent, Trump can do anything he wants to aid his own re-election if he just says that he believes it (the action(s) and his re-election) are in the nation's best interest. Q.E.D.

[RGTIndy]

15. It won't matter to the cult

But it seems to me just going around saying "I can do anything I want" won't lure many independents and undecideds. I guess we are about to find out.

[Still In Wisconsin]

18. Thing is I don't think Trump needs to lure anybody.

He's shown that all he has to do is keep the MAGAs energized and every Republican will fall in line because they fear them, his rabid base.

[RGTIndy]

46. 28% of Americans identify as Republican

You can’t win the Presidency with only self identified Republicans (or Democrats for that matter)

[Still In Wisconsin]

48. Correct. But if any Republican loses the MAGA vote they lose their election.

Well, any Republican with a challenger who is within, say, 20 points. I'm talking here about Senators and Congressmen/women.

[AJT]

51. He can, and probably will, win in many low population states

and southern states. He only needs the electoral college.

[RGTIndy]

52. I'm not sure why you think that

but your impression of "the heartland" is not accurate. Even most "Red States" are far from a majority of self identified Republicans. There are only 6 states with 50% or more of self identified Republicans: Wyoming 67%, Utah 56%, North Dakota 56%, Idaho 53%, Montana 51% and Alabama 50%; combined they have 28 electoral votes. In these swing states, the percentage of self identified Republicans is not enough to win: Ohio 42%, Wisconsin 42%, Virginia 38%, Pennsylvania 37%, Florida 35%, Arizona 34% Michigan 34%, Nevada 34%, Colorado 33% North Carolina 30%. Yes Trump is likely to win in those low population and southern states, but even there he can't win most of those states without self identified independents or crossover Democrats, and he certainly can't win in the swing states with just "the base".

[uponit7771]

20. THIS !!!! This is the bet democrats and the rest of America lovers are making. Now its time for

... Biden to beat Trump up with his criminality.

[wiggs]

24. with all this criminality known, it means that the Trumpsters MUST get re-elected regardless of

method so that the lot of them don't end up in jail.

[wryter2000]

26. Hope he keeps it up

Right up until November

[Bradical79]

37. Breaking where?

[brush]

41. Midday on MSNBC

[coti]

45. Let's start a new round of impeachment. nt

[BumRushDaShow]

47. They are both on MSNBC right now (by phone)

Ari is in for Rachel.

[Under The Radar]

49. Don't forget 50 republican senators

They stopped the impeachment trial where witnesses outside were implicating the entire crime syndicate.
Chief Justice John Roberts held the rug up while the Senate swept the dirt under it.
2 1/2 branches of government against 1/2 branch....we can’t fight a conventional fight here, we have to be insurgents, from the shadows, and heavy in numbers to even have a chance.

[ck4829]

50. K&R