From THE HILL:
Rudy Giuliani’s associate Lev Parnas revealed new accusations against President Trump and his administration in an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Wednesday night.
They’re just being polite. Rudy Giuliani, Twitler, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, William Barr, John Bolton, Devin Nunes, Faux News talking asshole John Solomon and evil attorneys Victoria Toensing and Joe DiGenova had better hope Lev was wearing a condom, because he f#¢ked them but good, got the sheets wet and left without leaving any money on the nightstand.
A day after the House published evidence provided by Parnas for the Senate impeachment trial, Parnas unveiled his take on what has been going on behind the scenes with the White House’s Ukraine policy.
Giuliani’s associate connected Trump directly to the controversy and pressure campaign in Ukraine to get the country to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, who sat on the board of the Ukrainian company Burisma.
Here are some of the accusations that Parnas made:
1. He claimed Trump threatened to withhold more than just military aid from Ukraine
…snip…
“The message was: It wasn’t just military aid. It was all aid,” he said. “Basically the relationship would be sour. We would stop giving them any kind of aid.”
The associate to the president’s personal attorney said the aid was clearly contingent on U.S. demands, primarily the launch of an investigation into the Bidens.
…snip…
2. He implicated Attorney General Barr, saying he “had to have known everything”
Giuliani’s associate continued by connecting Attorney General Bill Barr to the pressure campaign, saying that Giuliani had contacted the attorney general about the attempts to get Ukraine to announce a Biden investigation
“Barr had to have known everything,” he said. “Attorney General Barr was basically on the team.”
…snip…
3. “Trump knew exactly what was going on”
…snip…
Maddow asked Parnas about that “main inaccuracy or the main lie being told” that he felt he could correct.
He responded: “That the president didn’t know what was going on. President Trump knew exactly what was going on.”
Parnas continued, saying that he would not act without “the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president,” and added that Trump’s claim that he doesn’t know Parnas is a lie.
…snip…
4. He alleged Pence skipped Zelenksy’s inauguration because of Ukraine pressure campaign
…snip…
When Maddow asked if the vice president knew his visit was involved in a “quid pro quo,” Parnas quoted Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s comments during the impeachment inquiry: “Everybody was in the loop.”
…snip…
5. He asserted that the Ukraine campaign “was never about corruption [but] strictly about Burisma”
…snip…
“And that was another thing that they were looking into, but it was never about corruption,” Parnas said. “It was never — it was strictly about Burisma, which included Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.”
Parnas said that he was shocked to see Devin Nunes participating in the impeachment hearings as the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, because he met with Nunes several times at a Twitler hotel. He said that Nunes didn’t want to draw a lot of attention to himself, because he was already under investigation by the Ethics Committee. To avoid that, he hooked Parnas up with his aide, Derek Harvey, to assist him in the Ukraine business. Harvey didn’t have to be briefed, because he was already up to speed on the supposed dirt on Biden. If this doesn’t force the House Ethics Committee to open an investigation, I don’t know what will.
Parnas also said that John Bolton was in the loop and fully aware of what was going on. Bolton already said he wants to testify, and this forces him to do so if he wants to salvage any part of his reputation. I’m not a lawyer, so I am wondering if executive privilege can be claimed, because Giuliani wrote a letter that said he was Twitler’s personal attorney. If he was not working on behalf of the government, then where does executive privilege fit in?
On a personal note, I despise Victoria Toensing and her husband Joe DiGenova. Years ago, Dan Abrams had a show on MSNBC. Viewers were allowed to call in and comment. If they liked your comment, you could speak on the air. I called him a few times and was on the air a few times (three, if I remember correctly). One time was when Toensing and DiGenova were on and giggling about Enron and how so many people lost their jobs. Now, when you called the show, you had to call at the beginning. If they liked what you had to say, they would tell you to mute your TV and stay on the line. You had to wait for at least a half hour. I didn’t mute my TV, I just made it lower and then muted it when I was on the air. I listened to those 2 gasbags, and I just kept getting angrier and angrier. By the time I was allowed to speak, I was not about to let anyone else get a word in edgewise. I said that it was disgusting how the three of them (Dan Abrams included) could sit there and make light of what had happened. I said that I didn’t give a damn about the executives, because they took their money and ran, but there were a lot of middle class people working there who lost their jobs, their benefits and their dignity. I said that, for the three’s amusement, maybe a few of them will die of cancer, because they no longer had health insurance, or maybe a few will fling themselves off a roof in despair. Dan Abrams apologized for making light of it, but the two evil ones just sat their with their self-satisfied ugly smirks on their faces. But I digress…
Tonight’s interview with Parnas was just the first half. If you missed it, make sure to find it online. It was one bomb after another. Lev Parnas was a surprise to me. I was expecting a cartoon Russian, but his English was perfect, and he is not a stupid man at all. Tomorrow night is the second half. There will be no acceptable excuse for not watching it!
HYSTERICAL RAISINS 
i like your version of shit hitting the fan. i hope people are starting to wake up. otherwise yertle McConnell will attempt to exonerate twittler w/o witnesses & documents and move on. let’s hope americans aren’t stupid enough to let him.
One can only hope. People love a good mob movie. Hopefully, Parnas will get their attention, and they’ll want to hear more. It’s not just his word against anyone else’s. He has receipts. Devin Nunes can say he doesn’t even know the guy or met him once or twice, but Parnas has phone records. The thing that really stuck with me is when Parnas asked why the leaders of Ukraine would meet with him if he was not referred by someone at the top. It doesn’t make any sense for any officials, Ukrainian or American, to meet with with this schlemiel unless he was working for someone a lot more powerful. He had the seal of approval from Rudy who explicitly told the Ukrainians that he was working for Twitler. There is no room for doubt. Nothing else makes sense.
Happy New Year, Nonnie!
Shona Tova!
It’s hard not to get our hopes up that justice will finally be served on this illegal and corrupt administration. Ancient Greeks described Parnas as a mountain where the Muses dwell. Let’s hope the singing of the mafiosi muse named after a lion helps inspire courage enough in despicables Collins, Murkowski, Romney and the like to summon witnesses.
*sigh*
Shona Tova, my dear Ilya to you and to Susanna.
I don’t know if I have my hopes up for the Senate to do the right thing, but I do have my hopes up a bit that the American people are going to see this for what it is. Like I said above, Americans love mob movies, and you can’t help but see that Twitler was acting as a mob boss, and Rudy is is consigliere. Lev and Igor and Mulvaney and Nunes and the others were the mob soldiers. Even if Murkowski, Collins and Romney don’t do their duty (I have more faith in Murkowski than the others), they won’t be hearing the evidence in a vacuum. The media is not going to stop investigating or reporting on what went on, so they will have to answer to their voters and to history.
…my question is: Will this be enough to destroy the Orange one (a.k.a “the Anti-Christ”) in the WH? My nerves can’t take much more of this. I saw the interview with Rachel and Parnas (how much do I love that woman!), and I will watch part 2 tonight. Now if we can get the Dems to fight Trump instead of each other, maybe we may triumph in Nov.
I think the House needs to name Rachel a House Manager for the impeachment trial. That was a masterful interview, and it was made better by it being prerecorded so Rachel could add facts and context to it. I can only imagine that they saved the best for Part Deux, and if Part One was so edge-of-your-seat amazeballs, I can’t wait to see what he says tonight.
Trump has said numerous times that he did not know Parnas…kinda hard to claim “Executive Privilege” if you don’t know the guy.
Hello Bruce,
Welcome to The Raisin! 😀
Twitler will claim executive privilege if Bolton wants to testify (or Mulvaney or any of the other thugs). My argument is that Rudy said he was representing Twitler as a person, not as the president. Therefore, if Bolton knew about crimes, and they were done in the name of Twitler, the person not the president, then how can Twitler shut him up? It was actually a crime to not give the money to Ukraine when they were supposed to get it. I’m not a lawyer, but I would imagine that privilege doesn’t come into play when it is used to cover up a crime.
Unfortunately we all know what happens when bowling pins get knocked down — the machine just sets them up again. Senate Republicans are already making it clear that they’ll ignore what Parnas has revealed. Their grounds for doing so are transparently flimsy, but the Trumpanzee voters will approve — and that’s all that matters to these cowards.
Of course with toilet bowling we should get a chance at a final, definitive flush — but that won’t be until November.
I think the Senate Rethugs are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. If they vote to have witnesses and see all the evidence, they’ll be primaried by the ultra-right. If they vote against witnesses and evidence, they will still have to deal with the evidence and testimony coming out, if only in the media and maybe in some other legal setting. The people who are in the middle might not like the idea of a sham trial, and they won’t like the federal government being run like the Stupid Mafia. That might swing enough votes to the Dems, and Yertle will have kissed his majority goodbye. If he keeps his majority, maybe it will only be by a couple of seats,and it will be more difficult for him to get anything passed.
Of course this is yet another person that Twitler will or has already claimed to not know. He really does know how to use selective memory. From my little old perspective, I don’t think anything will happen to Trump and he will be deemed totally innocent by the scum bag repubs that are party loyal and fearful of losing their cushy government jobs. They are all mouth and yes men/ women who do not possess the courage or the balls- which ever word best describes the inept senators and representatives. And with Rudy G. in the middle of fray you can bet that there is going to one hellva of show at trial time. I could not bear to watch that for fear I’d have a stroke while watching all the buffoons lie and act stupid. Apparently the repubs are somehow smarted than the democrats since their fearless leader has gotten away with baring any witness from testifying. If Bolton had any credibility he would have already told Trump to go to hell and told everything that he knows. But that is highly unlikely to happen as well. What I do not understand is how a president can make his own rules by forbidding his people and ex-people to testify. How does he get away with all of the bull crap?
I have to believe there are people in swing states who are watching all of this and are getting very tired of the chaos in the country and the world caused by the shithead in the Oval Office. Twitler has his diehards in his cult, and they are loud, but there are a lot others who voted for him and now have buyers remorse.
I really hope and pray that you are correct.
“A day after the House published evidence provided by Parnas…”
Somebody doesn’t know the difference between evidence and hearsay.
Don’t worry, Ed, you can still learn the difference. Start with Google.
“Ed” a.k.a. “Ed Martin” is a troll. He seems to specialize in leaving wingnut comments on blog posts which have recently been linked from Crooks and Liars. Maybe he figures they’ll get seen by more people that way.
I know. I looked at his comment history here. I answer him once, and then I ignore him. Thanks for the heads-up, though, Infidel. I appreciate it.