• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Lev Parnas is now Trump's worst nightmare

ludin said:
Yea that is what i am looking at as well. this is right up there with cohen and all of his antics.
This guy is a known liar and fraud and any information he has is dubious at best.

the fact that he already under multiple federal charges already tells us a lot.
he will throw anything he can out there to try and get a deal from schiff and schiff
is so far out there and as we have seen will accept any information no how much unreliable
it is to take out trump.
Click to expand...


Well, Bolton's testimony hold's the key to the whole thing.

Not allowing Bolton's testimony will be a travesty for justice.

Either justice is what America is all about, or it is not.

Apparently, for republicans, they lost the meaning of what the flag "the republic for which it stands" means, and have sunk into a cesspool of corruption and crime.
 
ludin said:
maddow is a hack and has proven it time and time again.
she admitted to illegally obtaining his tax returns. claimed to have this huge story.
released it and showed that trump paid millions of dollars in taxes just as he said.

maddow research is as about as reliable as Dan rather.
which shows that MSNBC has 0 integrity as she still has a job after
3 or 4 of her gotcha stories backfired.

now she pulls on a guy who is under multiple federal indictments as a trustworthy source.

you guys should fact check yourselves better.
this is avenati all over again. ol we have the goods on kavanaugh turned out to be a fabricated lie.
Click to expand...



Your crazy. She's a crack investigator extraordinaire. Her hits to misses ratio are way way way way in favor of hits.

What, compared to Hannity and his conspiracy theories?

She did not illegally obtain Trump's tax return. The truth is more likely to be that Trump sent those to her, himself.


TRue, she hyped it a bit, but Trump hypes everything every day of the week, and if a little hype bothers you, a lot of hype by Trump must enrage you.


But it doesn't, so, you're in hypocrite territory.
 
TomFitz said:
Parnas is a first hand witness, who just testified before the entire world on television.

He named all the names. His interview reads (curiously?), like a witness list.

McConnell could not hold his votes to dismiss the case.

He is already in trouble with his votes to prevent witnesses. This virtually assures that he will lose that battle, and the cynical attempt to keep the media away from the trial.

Parnas’ credibility is bolstered by the consistant narrative of seventeen witnesses in the investigation. The named names can corroborate (or disprove) all of it. The nation will demand to watch.

Some will challenge Parnas’ credibility. After all, he’s basically a bag man.

But that’s part of the trouble with Trump world. George Papadopolous was a bag man too.
Click to expand...


If Parnas whole story which is huge is airtight then it's probably an indicator it was spun somewhere else.

If Parnas story can be picked apart for an inconsistency here or there then it's probably an indication of simple human error in recalling and in trying to present real events -- events that are complicated, complex and intertwined in real life.

Parnas needs to be checked out forthwith for several reasons, one being he's not cooperating with SDNY. In this respect, the single fact we've seen at the thread is that none of the Putin-Trump Rowers can pick Parnas apart in anything he said to Rachel Madow. The only things the Rowers have at this point are the obvious ones, ie, Parnas is a Trump League Thug which only reflects on them, and that Parnas spoke to Rachel Madow which leaves the Rowers with only tomatoes to throw.
 
OscarLevant said:
Well, it does put Barr as a witness, and so he must recuse himself. But, of course, he won't do that, he's too much of a Trump butt kisser.
Click to expand...

We know this is Buffalo Bob's second tour as AG yet few people anticipated Barr wearing his long closeted Trump armband so prominently this time around.

GAO just released its conclusion Trump violated the law in withholding DoD funds from Ukraine so The Buffalo should be getting it on by hollering at GAO anytime now. Start investigating GAO.
 
MovingPictures said:
There is absolutely no reason for Parnas and Giuliani to not testify as witnesses before the Senate. There is no executive privilege claim that can be made, so it's obvious.

They would be absolute train wrecks in any depositions.
Click to expand...
Yeah, obviously he has no claim with Parnas. He can muddy the waters on Giuliani, but may have a hard-time differentiating between private & personal attorney.
 
Chomsky said:
Yeah, obviously he has no claim with Parnas. He can muddy the waters on Giuliani, but may have a hard-time differentiating between private & personal attorney.
Click to expand...
The boundary between client-attorney privilege is exactly the kind of thing Roberts can rule on, without the need for a full court review.
 
Chomsky said:
Yeah, obviously he has no claim with Parnas. He can muddy the waters on Giuliani, but may have a hard-time differentiating between private & personal attorney.
Click to expand...

Has trump paid Rudy any money? They both have said no, so there may not be any privilege there........
 
If Lev testifies in either House or Senate it will be without benefit of Constitutional Immunity. Lev appears to be making noise at this late date that he would be willing to testify without benefit of Constitutional Immunity. Nobody was screaming for his testimony before this because they could not offer him Constitutional Immunity. They were screaming for his documents and his phone records which they eventually secured yesterday.
 
Piglet said:
That's my impression as well.
Click to expand...

The real problem is this: this is precisely the sort of thing that requires an independent counsel or a Congressional investigation.

The former hits a brick wall because the Attorney General is corrupt, may be involved, and sees himself as the personal attorney for Donald trump.

The latter hits a brick wall because a Congressional investigation would require documentation to be provided by the DOJ and the White House, and both of those are corrupt and would never furnish such material.

Therefore, we're left with no choice but to take Lev Parnas at his word.
 
Cardinal said:
The real problem is this: this is precisely the sort of thing that requires an independent counsel or a Congressional investigation.

The former hits a brick wall because the Attorney General is corrupt, may be involved, and sees himself as the personal attorney for Donald trump.

The latter hits a brick wall because a Congressional investigation would require documentation to be provided by the DOJ and the White House, and both of those are corrupt and would never furnish such material.

Therefore, we're left with no choice but to take Lev Parnas at his word.
Click to expand...

Well actually the documentary the phone records are pretty compelling stuff. They are actually more valuable at this point than Lev's testimony because they fit into the timeline in many cases where they are needed and the phone records and text messages are in many cases with other players in this drama.

Then the Rudy letter to Zalinsky is a real kill shot for Rudy and for Trump as that letter blows apart all the bull crap that both Rudy and Trump have been throwing about what Rudy was doing and what Trump knew about it.
 
jnug said:
Well actually the documentary the phone records are pretty compelling stuff. They are actually more valuable at this point than Lev's testimony because they fit into the timeline in many cases where they are needed and the phone records and text messages are in many cases with other players in this drama.

Then the Rudy letter to Zalinsky is a real kill shot for Rudy and for Trump as that letter blows apart all the bull crap that both Rudy and Trump have been throwing about what Rudy was doing and what Trump knew about it.
Click to expand...

Parnas's notes and interview material are damning to be sure, but the nails in the coffin are communications and emails from those at the top of the food chain. And since they're corrupt and Republicans in the Senate are okay with that corruption, we'll never get that information. This is why our only recourse is to take Parnas at his word. So we're basically agreeing, though we're arriving at that agreement from slightly different starting points.
 
Cardinal said:
Parnas's notes and interview material are damning to be sure, but the nails in the coffin are communications and emails from those at the top of the food chain. And since they're corrupt and Republicans in the Senate are okay with that corruption, we'll never get that information. This is why our only recourse is to take Parnas at his word. So we're basically agreeing, though we're arriving at that agreement from slightly different starting points.
Click to expand...

Since it appears to me that Lev is making noise about being willing to testify without benefit of Constitutional Immunity its simply a matter of serving him a subpoena from either House or Senate. So NOW, if they want him it appears they can get him because the issue of Constitutional Immunity while engaged in an active prosecution would appear to be off the table.
 
Cardinal said:
The real problem is this: this is precisely the sort of thing that requires an independent counsel or a Congressional investigation.

The former hits a brick wall because the Attorney General is corrupt, may be involved, and sees himself as the personal attorney for Donald trump.

The latter hits a brick wall because a Congressional investigation would require documentation to be provided by the DOJ and the White House, and both of those are corrupt and would never furnish such material.

Therefore, we're left with no choice but to take Lev Parnas at his word.
Click to expand...

We really can't do that because he's under multiple indictments and could very well be "pulling a Cohen."

We have to wait for either first-hand corroboration or information to the contrary.
 
Piglet said:
We really can't do that because he's under multiple indictments and could very well be "pulling a Cohen."

We have to wait for either first-hand corroboration or information to the contrary.
Click to expand...

The White House and the DOJ are of course free to release crucial documentation and testimony directly refuting Parnas's claims. They won't, and you know why.
 
MovingPictures said:
The boundary between client-attorney privilege is exactly the kind of thing Roberts can rule on, without the need for a full court review.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. The Senate can over-rule him at any turn with a simple majority.
 
SCrider said:
Has trump paid Rudy any money? They both have said no, so there may not be any privilege there........
Click to expand...
Obviously, Trump's trying to have it both ways with Rudy. Hopefully it falls apart to the point of costing him the election.
 
Cardinal said:
My spidey senses tell me we should wait for everything he claimed to be corroborated. Parnas is a thug who's been perfectly happy playing with bad people for a long time, and we don't know yet whose game he's playing.

I think we should exercise as much caution here as we exercised when waiting to see if we could actually trust Michael Cohen.
Click to expand...

He is a thug who was under the direction of the President. That tells us a lot already.

d59039fa-345f-4d6c-98ae-976b2932ccbe-lev_parnas_in_white_house.JPG
 
Last edited:
Fletch said:
Then the House should have called them
Click to expand...

I haven't heard a single Trump supporter/republican/conservative say "we shouldn't bring Parnas/Giuliani/Bolton/Pompeo/Mulvaney in because they won't be able to get us the truth".

It's really as simple as that. This is an impeachment as laid out by our constitution. It should be taken seriously regardless of your politics. We have never had a trial in the senate with no witnesses. The only questions should be "is this information relevant and is it needed to determine the truth of what happened". Democrats so far have followed these guidelines perfectly. Trump supporters/republicans are trying to talk out of both sides of their mouths and say that the president is innocent and did nothing wrong, but we can't have any documents handed over nor have anyone testify and show how innocent he is." It should be offensive to americans intellect that republican trump supporters think the rest of the country is stupid enough to fall for such an cowardly, dishonest and ignorant argument.
 
roughdraft274 said:
I haven't heard a single Trump supporter/republican/conservative say "we shouldn't bring Parnas/Giuliani/Bolton/Pompeo/Mulvaney in because they won't be able to get us the truth".

It's really as simple as that. This is an impeachment as laid out by our constitution. It should be taken seriously regardless of your politics. We have never had a trial in the senate with no witnesses. The only questions should be "is this information relevant and is it needed to determine the truth of what happened". Democrats so far have followed these guidelines perfectly. Trump supporters/republicans are trying to talk out of both sides of their mouths and say that the president is innocent and did nothing wrong, but we can't have any documents handed over nor have anyone testify and show how innocent he is." It should be offensive to americans intellect that republican trump supporters think the rest of the country is stupid enough to fall for such an cowardly, dishonest and ignorant argument.
Click to expand...

Nice rant but you didnt answer the question. Why isnt Parnas sitting right now before Nadlers committee? You have to understand that there is no way he will be called before the senate. You might get witnesses but you will never get this undeposed wild card. This is the responsibility of the House. Why can none of you guys admit this?
 
Tangmo said:
If Parnas whole story which is huge is airtight then it's probably an indicator it was spun somewhere else.

If Parnas story can be picked apart for an inconsistency here or there then it's probably an indication of simple human error in recalling and in trying to present real events -- events that are complicated, complex and intertwined in real life.

Parnas needs to be checked out forthwith for several reasons, one being he's not cooperating with SDNY. In this respect, the single fact we've seen at the thread is that none of the Putin-Trump Rowers can pick Parnas apart in anything he said to Rachel Madow. The only things the Rowers have at this point are the obvious ones, ie, Parnas is a Trump League Thug which only reflects on them, and that Parnas spoke to Rachel Madow which leaves the Rowers with only tomatoes to throw.
Click to expand...

Trump and company know all about Lev Parnas.
 
MovingPictures said:
The boundary between client-attorney privilege is exactly the kind of thing Roberts can rule on, without the need for a full court review.
Click to expand...

I dont think he can rule on that. That had to go through the court system. There is no way he will be able to make that sort of judgement on his own.
 
SCrider said:
Has trump paid Rudy any money? They both have said no, so there may not be any privilege there........
Click to expand...

There may not be. But the only way to find out would have been for the House to subpoena Rudy and test the lawyer/client privilege in the courts. They didnt, so you wont be hearing from him.
 
OscarLevant said:
Well, Bolton's testimony hold's the key to the whole thing.

Not allowing Bolton's testimony will be a travesty for justice.

Either justice is what America is all about, or it is not.

Apparently, for republicans, they lost the meaning of what the flag "the republic for which it stands" means, and have sunk into a cesspool of corruption and crime.
Click to expand...


I think you’ve hit on the crux of the matter.

The Republicans echoed Trump and announced that they had every intention of conducting a travesty.

McConnell boasted about being partisan.

Ever since, the worms have been slowly turning.

Whether that makes a difference in Trump’s acquital remains to be seen.

But the price of acquitting Trump has been going up steadily, ever since the investigation was first announced.

Whether the Senate convicts Trump, or whether the voters do in November, it appears as though the deed will be done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom