The Impeachment Thread

#33,603
#33,603
BowlBrother85 said:
Call it what you want, it is definitely firsthand information. Lev Parnas was in a position to know everything that he is providing testimonial accounts of... and he is giving very specific details.
Click to expand...

it may be first hand information. i saw his statement that Trump knew everything he was doing. That is not first hand; that is an assessment that says "he had to know everything I was doing".

first hand would be what he witnessed physically

if he said he was told something about Barr that is not first hand. Did he meet with Barr?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77, AM64, vols40 and 1 other person
#33,604
#33,604
BowlBrother85 said:
What Parnas is telling Maddow, is highly relevant and firsthand information. It's also very compelling in its condemnation of Trump, Barr, Pence and Giuliani. There is obviously the question of the credibility of Lev Parnas, but he is providing very specific details to the time, place and meetings with Giuliani and what was said. It implicates everyone... and Barr looks terrible. He has to respond to what has been said in this interview.
Click to expand...
That’s a lot of impeachment hearings
 
#33,606
#33,606
PeaceCorpsVol said:
It’s obviously a biased headline but I challenge anyone to debunk the facts
Click to expand...
1579143087341.png
In 1998, President Bill Clinton became the first president since Nixon to assert executive privilege and lose in court, when a federal judge ruled that Clinton aides could be called to testify in the Lewinsky scandal.

So President Clinton did try to block 14 witnesses and lost in court. So I guess the first three are out.

For the record, I thought what the Republicans done to Clinton was wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#33,608
#33,608
Sandman 423 said:
View attachment 254598
In 1998, President Bill Clinton became the first president since Nixon to assert executive privilege and lose in court, when a federal judge ruled that Clinton aides could be called to testify in the Lewinsky scandal.

So President Clinton did try to block 14 witnesses and lost in court. So I guess the first three are out.

For the record, I thought what the Republicans done to Clinton was wrong.
Click to expand...

#4 falls under executive privilege as well.

#5 is awaiting judicial ruling if pursued

#6 is out too - there were no new fact witnesses (per this graphic) in the Clinton impeachment trial. For some reason Dems want to have the Senate hear from new witnesses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and AM64
#33,612
#33,612
volinbham said:
it may be first hand information. i saw his statement that Trump knew everything he was doing. That is not first hand; that is an assessment that says "he had to know everything I was doing".

first hand would be what he witnessed physically

if he said he was told something about Barr that is not first hand. Did he meet with Barr?
Click to expand...
Parnas is in a position to relay what Giuliani has told him... and that appears to have been a lot.
 
#33,617
#33,617
BowlBrother85 said:
Fox News (Martha McCallum) has been running clips of the interview. They can't just ignore it. The allegations are too explosive and Lev Parnas is a central figure to this story.
Click to expand...
Hopefully they were using the clips as comedy hour. But any how, when will these next round of impeachment hearings start from the honorable bug eyed Schiff?
 
#33,620
#33,620
BowlBrother85 said:
Not necessarily.
Click to expand...

sigh. if he's talking about something Rudy did or told him to do that is first hand knowledge "Rudy told me to do "x"". If he's saying Rudy told me "Barr said x" or "Trump knows all about what you are up to" that is hearsay. He does not have first hand knowledge about Trump or Barr in either of those examples.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top