Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 45
| visibility 820

Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 1:00 PM

says he wants to testify under oath, calls on Giuliani and Trump to also testify under oath. Says he has tapes and documents that "Trump knew what was going on in Ukraine", "there were other quid pro quos other than the Jan. 25 calls, a lot before that call" Parnas is currently under indictment for funneling illegal foreign money to Republican campaigns.

It's a pretty good bet they really, really don't want him to testify. Rep. Sen John Cornyn says he's just "ready to move on" without calling any witnesses. Now there's a surprise. This thing is about to get crazy.


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/lev-parnas-indicted-associate-giuliani-tries-attend-trump-impeachment-trial-n1125601


badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Where's Avenatti when you need him?


Jan 29, 2020, 1:09 PM

Another day, another example of dems desperation.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Where's Avenatti when you need him?


Jan 29, 2020, 2:10 PM

He showed up at the Senate Trial, not a "Dem".

Interesting that you don't actually want to hear what Parnas has to say. Nor the tapes and documents in his possession, or John Bolton who was the National Security Advisor and a Republican Icon.

But that's ok. You do you and I'll do me and you and Trump and anyone else I conclude are not Liberals. ;)


badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I'd be delighted to hear what both have to say.


Jan 29, 2020, 2:32 PM

In fact, this is more about what you want so I ask you...

Are you willing to set new precedence by having he house throw an impeachment case together, toss it through the transom and expect the senate do the house's investigative work? Is your hate for Trump such that you're willing to allow any simple majority to vote to impeach a president then force the Senate to try the case while the house majority continues to 'discover,' witnesses that they should have called in their investigation?

Please don't hand me that 'we tried but Trump wouldn't cooperate.' chit. No president has ever given the house everything they wanted without a court battle.

Sure, we'll get to Bolton and Paranas as soon as the senate finds Trump not guilty. I mean, if you remove Trump now what are you going to do for the next 8 months, impeach Pence? That might take a week then what?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I'd be delighted to hear what both have to say.


Jan 29, 2020, 3:14 PM

No, that's a cheap shot. And I don't agree with your premise at all. Every President who has ever claimed 'absolute' immunity has been shot down by the courts. No exceptions. Every President who has refused a Congressional Subpoena has been ordered to comply by the Supreme Court. Most aren't naive enough to think that going to court again on the exact same issue is anything other than a ploy to put the impeachment off until after the election.

Your defense of this situation is not a real defense, it's just excuses. No one knew what Bolton new or would say until last week. And no court would refuse 'new evidence' that arises during a trial from being allowed in. In this case, they don't want him to testify because now they DO know what Bolton will say.

I would argue that far to many are loyal to Trump rather than the Constitution.

I'll ask you, would you accept as precedent that a future President from the Democratic Party may solicit help from a foreign govt to help his reelection campaign? That he can refuse house subpoenas and force other 'public servants' to do the same?

I have no doubt that the Dems are just as shady and without ethics as the Reps. But, unfortunately, Trump has handed them this impeachment on a platter. John Kelly himself told Trump that if gets a yes man for a chief of staff- he will be impeached. But, that's what he did. You can hate the Dems all you want, but they didn't create this situation, Trump did.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I'd be delighted to hear what both have to say.


Jan 29, 2020, 3:32 PM

You say that we are loyal to Trump and not the constitution.

But you are saying that it's obstruction for the President to use Executive Privilege? That's in the constitution you know...

Also, you aren't the least bit concerned by this convenient leak by the partisan New York Times? Especially with all of the hoax "bombshells" over the last 3 years.

Trump handed them impeachment on a silver platter? Why is it so contested then? Why has the American public's perception on impeachment remained unchanged if this is such an open and shut case?

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Yes, going to court is the historically normal way it works.


Jan 29, 2020, 3:36 PM [ in reply to Re: I'd be delighted to hear what both have to say. ]

You have a huge set of stones. After knowing that Hillary benefited from Russian agents supplying Steel, another foreign agent with dirt on Trump and you're grandstanding and flag waving about election interference?

You're screaming about the constitution while denying the POTUS executive privilege and 2nd article rights?

The last dem president spied on his political opponent's, Trump's campaign and you're crying about fair and right and holy?

Your party brought impeachment charges on hearsay, supposition, presumption and opinion and it's Trump fault that they heard, supposed, presumed and formed uninformed opinions?

Ok, whatever!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 1:16 PM

Question...

If Parnas was originally on Trump's side, then why was he secretly recording Trump during the dinner he attended.

Really makes you think, doesn't it.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 2:14 PM

Not really, he didn't make the recording, the other Giuliani associate Igor Fruman recorded it. The other question one would ask is, why would those 2 men be having dinner with the President, 7 months before Giuliani began working with them. Answer: Parnas and Fruman donated $350,000 to Trump's re-election campaign PAC, they also paid Rudy $500,000.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


whoa whoa whoa


Jan 29, 2020, 2:20 PM

Hold the phone, big money donors get special privileges like dinners? When did this start?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 1:17 PM

It's funny how lib media has made everyone think that any quid pro quo is illegal.

Isn't that how negotiations work?

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 2:18 PM


It's funny how lib media has made everyone think that any quid pro quo is illegal.

Isn't that how negotiations work?




My understanding is that ALL instances of foreign assistance are accompanied by a quid pro quo. But those quid pro quos are in the national interest, favorable trade deals, fighting terrorism etc, etc.

In this case the quid pro quo was for the benefit of Trump personally. Imagine if Barack Obama had withheld military assistance to Mexico, another Ally, in return for an investigation into Mitch McConnell. Reps. faces would have melted had that happened.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


how do we know it was done to help him personally?


Jan 29, 2020, 2:27 PM

That’s the speculation, where’s the proof?

That’s the biggest thing about this that interests me, everything you said at the beginning is probably agreed upon by everyone.

The one missing link is how do you prove he did this for his own personal gain?

Without that being documented, I just don’t see a conviction.

It looks bad, it sounds bad, but there’s nothing that actually outright proves it was all for personal gain (that I’ve seen or read)

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: how do we know it was done to help him personally?


Jan 29, 2020, 2:41 PM

You are correct in that Fluff. But I think what their arguing is that his request to smear Joe Biden was for no other reason than to benefit his reelection. Sondland testified that a 'real investigation' wasn't necessary but only a public announcement of an investigation would be sufficient. It's a strong argument, but I think the whole country would benefit from hearing first hand witnesses. Up to this point, that has been impossible. Trump blocked witnesses from testifying, which is the subject of Article II, Obstruction of Congress.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


It's the only explanation left


Jan 29, 2020, 3:31 PM [ in reply to how do we know it was done to help him personally? ]

He had 2+ years to investigate Biden prior to Biden running for President, but didn't.

He didn't cite corruption in Ukraine, only Biden investigations and Crowdstrike which would also help him remove some of the russian cloud surrounding him by putting blame on Ukraine.

He only wanted an announcement for an investigation, he didn't care about an actual investigation.

He used his personal attorney and went around US Government

Republicans/Trump haven't said Biden broke any laws or is even suspected of breaking any specific laws, which is why Trump just wanted an announcement.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's the only explanation left


Jan 29, 2020, 3:55 PM

deweather said:

He had 2+ years to investigate Biden prior to Biden running for President, but didn't.

He didn't cite corruption in Ukraine, only Biden investigations and Crowdstrike which would also help him remove some of the russian cloud surrounding him by putting blame on Ukraine.

He only wanted an announcement for an investigation, he didn't care about an actual investigation.

He used his personal attorney and went around US Government

Republicans/Trump haven't said Biden broke any laws or is even suspected of breaking any specific laws, which is why Trump just wanted an announcement.




Your mind is about to be blown when all the info starts to come out on Biden.

His entire family made billions in other countries when he was in power. Biden admitted to breaking the law you putz.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

What law did he admit breaking?***


Jan 29, 2020, 4:07 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's the only explanation left


Jan 29, 2020, 4:20 PM [ in reply to Re: It's the only explanation left ]


Your mind is about to be blown when all the info starts to come out on Biden.

His entire family made billions in other countries when he was in power. Biden admitted to breaking the law you putz.



Do you have any links, research or any credible source that the Bidens have made "Billions" in other countries? It's not illegal for a child of a politician to make money. Ivanka and Jared can testify to that.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


but still speculation and which law did trump break?***


Jan 29, 2020, 5:33 PM [ in reply to It's the only explanation left ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


abuse of power and obstruction of congress


Jan 29, 2020, 6:07 PM

also this,

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gao-says-trump-admin-broke-law-ukraine

What would you need to know or what evidence would you need to have to have it rise past the level of "speculation?"

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 2:29 PM [ in reply to Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill ]

It is your opinion that the quid pro quo was only for the benefit of trump personally.

There has been 0 testimony/proof of this other than Sonland's presumptions. Absolutely 0. Sonland's only dialogue with Trump regarding this, trump said he "wanted nothing".

Ukraine has been known to be corrupt. Wouldn't it be in our national interest to ensure that countries that we send foreign aid to are not corrupt?

In your example with Obama...

I would have no issue with investigations into McConnell if McConnell admitted to a crime in his dealings with Mexico.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 2:54 PM

With respect, Sondland and Holmes both testified that on July 26, the day after 'the call', Trump asked Sondland if "they are going to do the investigations?". And on the very call that you mentioned, Trump did say 'there's no quid pro quo' and right after that, he outlined the very quid pro quo he just said didn't exist. One might remember that the call you reference was made 2 days after the Whistleblowers complaint became public.

Yes, Ukraine has been known for being corrupt. Yet, Trump gave hundreds of millions to them in both 2017 and 2018 without any concern for corruption. That Ukrainian President was removed from office for corruption. But, in 2019, polls began to surface showing that in a head to head matchup Biden would beat Trump. Suddenly, they argue, Trump decided that corruption was a big deal. Further, in 2019 the Dept. of Defense had already certified that Ukraine had made enough progress to fight corruption and there was no basis not to approve the money, which Congress immediately did.

As far as McConell, why would you investigate him if he'd already admitted to the crime?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 3:13 PM

The Biden interview where he bragged about a quid pro quo w/ Ukraine was in January 2018 and didn't get widely circulated until 2019.

So it would make sense that Trump didn't ask about Biden corruption when we gave them aid those years.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill


Jan 29, 2020, 3:59 PM


The Biden interview where he bragged about a quid pro quo w/ Ukraine was in January 2018 and didn't get widely circulated until 2019.

So it would make sense that Trump didn't ask about Biden corruption when we gave them aid those years.


That is a reasonable theory, I hadn't thought of that.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I know it really bothered me when Obama told the...


Jan 29, 2020, 2:33 PM [ in reply to Re: Lev Parnas arrives on Capitol Hill ]

Russian President that he would have more flexibility to negotiate after his election.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


you guys sure do pick some winners...***


Jan 29, 2020, 1:54 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If she's a hollerer, she'll be a screamer.
If she's a screamer, she'll get you arrested.


To be fair, they are just picking from Trump's associates***


Jan 29, 2020, 2:20 PM



2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-fordprefect.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

i think thats Rudy's, not Trumps***


Jan 29, 2020, 2:25 PM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2005_majors_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-xtiger.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


You're not helping.


Jan 29, 2020, 2:34 PM

Tell them when you step in chit you get it on you and Rudy going to Ukraine was bound to step in some deep chit.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Trump never met the guy


Jan 29, 2020, 2:41 PM [ in reply to i think thats Rudy's, not Trumps*** ]

https://www.businessinsider.com/giuliani-fixer-lev-parnas-photos-trump-family-2020-1

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-fordprefect.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

ive got a pic with Trump too.


Jan 29, 2020, 2:56 PM

he raped me!!!! MeToo

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2005_majors_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-xtiger.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Yeah, Parnas was just a Never Trumper, obviously


Jan 30, 2020, 5:34 PM

Just like Vindman or whoever else in the future happens to say anything that's not advantageous for Trump.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Epstein, too...?***


Jan 30, 2020, 5:47 PM [ in reply to ive got a pic with Trump too. ]



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: i think thats Rudy's, not Trumps***


Jan 29, 2020, 2:43 PM [ in reply to i think thats Rudy's, not Trumps*** ]

Actually, the tape that came out last week showing Parnas and Fruman at dinner with Trump was recorded 7 months prior to Rudy working with him. They paid Rudy $500,000 up front and off they went.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


so?


Jan 29, 2020, 2:58 PM

seriously, are you that stupid?

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2005_majors_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-xtiger.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: so?


Jan 29, 2020, 4:02 PM

xtiger said:

seriously, are you that stupid?




Huh? That post was in response to your saying that Parnas was a Rudy associate, not a Trump associate. The video was recorded 7 months before Parnas and Rudy worked together. Meaning that Parnas was originally a Trump associate, not a Rudy associate.

And no, I'm not stupid. Redneck. ;)

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Dems literally have no shame


Jan 29, 2020, 2:01 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Dems literally have no shame


Jan 29, 2020, 2:26 PM

T3Tiger said:

As if this guy's credibility wasn't already severely impaired, Schumer arranges for him to come there and then he spouts off Dem talking points on his walk to the Capitol. The Dem circus would rival Ringling Bros.




Really? How is this guys credibility impaired? Because he donated $350,000 to Trump's PAC? Or paid Rudy $500,000? Or that he was indicted for funnelling illegal foreign money into Republican campaigns?

Sure you can bet they don't want him to testify. And they think if Fox News sufficiently diminishes his credibility, then nobody will believe what he says. Discrediting the messenger, discredits the message. Only, in Parnas' case, he's willing to testify under oath and provide documents and tapes to support his testimony.

Well, put them all on the stand and lets all judge the truth of it. Trump blocked witnesses, Dems could have gone to court, but that wouldn't have been necessary if Trump hadn't blocked them. What's he hiding? It's seem pretty obvious to 75% of America, because they want to see witnesses called. Of those respondents, 49% of Republicans want to see witnesses as well.

https://www.axios.com/trump-impeachment-trial-witnesses-poll-1a23098b-df75-4731-b6e3-0c5978f84d7b.html

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Felix you're one triggered lil' guy


Jan 29, 2020, 2:38 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

ruhroh. Felix done got slammed***


Jan 29, 2020, 2:45 PM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2005_majors_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-xtiger.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Felix you're one triggered lil' guy


Jan 29, 2020, 3:37 PM [ in reply to Felix you're one triggered lil' guy ]

I wish I were little, I've put on 15 lbs in the last few months. Triggered? I'm sitting here drinking a cup of coffee, debating with you guys. You know, just like you are. That makes me triggered? If so, I'll be triggered if it makes you feel better.

You do this often T3, you get frustrated and start calling names and getting personal. I would suggest you put me on ignore. Save yourself some stress.

As far as Mulvaney's press conference, it wasn't the 'politics in foreign policy' comment that the media jumped on, it was the admission that they did "withhold the aid until the Ukrainians turn over the server." When a reporter responded that 'what you're describing IS a quid pro quo' Mulvaney responded, "we do it all the time, so get over it. There's always going to be politics involved in foreign policy."

The latter part of his statement is true, there is frequently politics in foreign policy, this is true with both parties, Israel being a prime example. But it was the first part of the statement that through everyone off.

It isn't misconstrued or misquoted, it's on video. It's hard to misconstrue what you hear coming out of a man's mouth on video. And the server? It doesn't exist, that was a creation of Rudy's and John Solomons.

Relax, take a walk. If you'd feel better putting me on ignore, be my guest. When you revert to name calling and insults, you lose credibility. Smoke a cigarette...it's easier. ;)

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Congrats. You just made my point.***


Jan 29, 2020, 3:43 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Felix you're one triggered lil' guy


Jan 29, 2020, 3:59 PM [ in reply to Re: Felix you're one triggered lil' guy ]

Felix2® said:

I wish I were little, I've put on 15 lbs in the last few months. Triggered? I'm sitting here drinking a cup of coffee, debating with you guys. You know, just like you are. That makes me triggered? If so, I'll be triggered if it makes you feel better.

You do this often T3, you get frustrated and start calling names and getting personal. I would suggest you put me on ignore. Save yourself some stress.

As far as Mulvaney's press conference, it wasn't the 'politics in foreign policy' comment that the media jumped on, it was the admission that they did "withhold the aid until the Ukrainians turn over the server." When a reporter responded that 'what you're describing IS a quid pro quo' Mulvaney responded, "we do it all the time, so get over it. There's always going to be politics involved in foreign policy."

The latter part of his statement is true, there is frequently politics in foreign policy, this is true with both parties, Israel being a prime example. But it was the first part of the statement that through everyone off.

It isn't misconstrued or misquoted, it's on video. It's hard to misconstrue what you hear coming out of a man's mouth on video. And the server? It doesn't exist, that was a creation of Rudy's and John Solomons.

Relax, take a walk. If you'd feel better putting me on ignore, be my guest. When you revert to name calling and insults, you lose credibility. Smoke a cigarette...it's easier. <img border=">">




Felix said he isn't triggered all the while writing a long reply about name calling etc... T3 only said you have a large set of balls. Talk about triggered.

It's funny that you are saying it came straight from his mouth so it has to be true.

And then you continue to say there is no proof of Biden doing anything wrong. LOL.

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Felix you're one triggered lil' guy


Jan 29, 2020, 4:17 PM

No, it was 88 that said I have a large set of balls, not T3. Try to keep up. Further, Biden was the
Vice President, he didn't have the authority do anything on his own. As you can see from the very same tape you cited, even the Ukrainians said 'who are you, you aren't the President your only the vice president' to which Biden replied "Call him!" Biden didn't have the authority to act on his on, he was given the task by Obama. But that doesn't support the conspiracy.

I find it odd that Reps continue to beat that same drum. Where do you get your information? Are you not aware that the whole Western Alliance, The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund wanted Shokin fired. They wanted to fire him because he WASN'T investigating corruption, Burisma being a prime example of an investigation that he'd been paid off to stuff. Further, the Burisma investigation was for activities from 2010 to 2012. Hunter Biden didn't join Burisma until 2014.

This information is easily found, it's not hidden. However, Trump supporters like to continue to repeat the false narrative that Biden intervened to save his son. It boggles the mind. :)

Now, I have disagreed with you using facts that can be easily found. I'm not mad at you nor do I think you're crazy. We merely disagree. We're Americans, we've been disagreeing for centuries. So don't start insulting me or calling me names. K? ;)

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


maybe his testimony will have the same impact as Cohen...


Jan 29, 2020, 2:30 PM

crooks testifying against other crooks

Powerful!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Kinda like these two crooks?


Jan 29, 2020, 2:51 PM



2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg2006_ncaa_champ.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Replies: 45
| visibility 820
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic