Lev Parnas implicates Trump on the eve of Senate impeachment trial
Category: News & Politics
Via: tessylo • 6 years ago • 90 commentsBy: David Knowles, Editor, Yahoo News
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Yahoo News
Lev Parnas implicates Trump on the eve of Senate impeachment trial
January 15, 2020, 9:56 PM EST
Lev Parnas, a key player in President Trump’s efforts to obtain a Ukrainian investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, gave a bombshell interview to MSNBC Wednesday that undercut the president’s defense just hours before the Senate was scheduled to begin his impeachment trial.
“It was all about Joe Biden, Hunter Biden and also Rudy had a personal thing with the Manafort stuff,” Parnas said of the efforts to convince Ukraine’s government to announce an investigation of the Bidens, “but it was never about corruption, it was strictly about Burisma, which included Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.”
Lev Parnas arriving at court in New York City, Dec. 2, 2019. (Photo: Seth Wenig/AP)
Parnas, a Soviet-born U.S. citizen who has been indicted by the Southern District of New York on campaign finance violations, turned over notes, text messages and other information to House investigators Wednesday. In his interview with Rachel Maddow, Parnas, who sat beside his lawyer, said he came forward because “I want to get the truth out because I think it’s important to the country, it’s important to me.”
Trump has sought to distance himself from Parnas and Igor Fruman, both of whom worked with Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s lawyer, on the efforts to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce an investigation of the Bidens, and on the campaign to oust U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.
“I don’t know those gentlemen,” Trump said in October about Parnas and Fruman, despite the fact that the men had been photographed together numerous times.
“He lied,” Parnas said, adding, “He knew exactly who we were.”
Parnas said the president was fully aware that he was working with Giuliani to secure Zelensky’s cooperation in an effort to tarnish the reputation of Biden, the leading Democratic candidate to run against Trump this year.
Lev Parnas on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow show on January 15, 2020. (Photo: Kelli R. Grant/Yahoo News)
"Trump knew exactly what was going on,” Parnas said, adding he “wouldn't do anything without consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president.”
Maddow asked Parnas about a handwritten note made during a phone conversation with Giuliani that he turned over to House investigators that included the line: “get Zalensky [sic] to announce that the Biden case will be investigated.”
“That was always the main objective," Parnas said of Trump’s motive for pressuring Ukraine’s government.
Parnas and Fruman, who has also been indicted, were given access to Ukrainian officials that Parnas, a Florida businessman with no diplomatic credentials or official post, said he would not have received otherwise.
"Why would President Zelensky’s inner circle, or Minister Avakov, or all these people, or President Poroshenko, meet with me?” Parnas told Maddow. “Who am I? They were told to meet with me. And that’s the secret that they’re trying to keep. I was on the ground doing their work.”
Parnas also said the Trump administration’s attempts to convince Ukraine to announce an investigation of the Bidens extended to Vice President Mike Pence.
Pence canceled his planned attendance at Zelensky’s inauguration as a way to further pressure him, Parnas said.
On his efforts with Giuliani to have Yovanovitch removed from office because she was not sufficiently supportive of Trump and was impeding efforts to secure the promise of an investigation into the Bidens, Parnas expressed regret.
“I don’t believe Ambassador Yovanovitch badmouthed Trump, and I want to apologize to her,” Parnas said.
The materials turned over to the House this week included text messages Parnas exchanged with a Trump campaign hanger-on named Robert Hyde. The messages referenced efforts to oust Yovanovitch, who was viewed as an obstacle to the deal Giuliani hoped to strike with Ukraine. Some of the messages had what appeared to be sinister overtones, implying that Yovanovitch was being followed and might be in danger, but Parnas downplayed that possibility to Maddow, saying he was only stringing Hyde along.
Parnas also told Maddow that Attorney General William Barr was aware of the efforts launched by Trump and Giuliani to discredit the Mueller investigation and procure an investigation of the Bidens.
“Mr. Barr had to have known everything," Parnas said, adding that he was in the room when Giuliani and others spoke with the attorney general.
Tags
Who is online
129 visitors
Proof that Crooked donnie is a crooked lying POS
"Parnas is charged with funneling foreign donations to candidates for federal and state offices to win potential influence. Fruman and Parnas have pleaded not guilty.
When he was arrested with Fruman, Parnas told U.S. Justice Department officials as part of his request for bail that he and his wife had around $450,000 in total assets and income, prosecutors have said.
But the couple actually had significantly more assets, prosecutors claimed in a court filing last week.
Those assets included a $1 million transfer from a Russian bank account in September, they said. That money came from Firtash’s lawyer, prosecutors disclosed for the first time Tuesday.
Prosecutors also alleged that Parnas lied or failed to disclose work and the payment from Firtash."
Parnas is a man looking for a deal and Adam schiff would like to give him one. That's fine, but the House conducted it's investigation. We can't have an ongoing investigation rife with leaks to the press during a trial. I hope McConnell tells Pelosi to have the House finish it's investigation before sending over the Articles of Impeachment.
Just like Crooked donnie, it's everyone else's fault but his
And Trump blocked a lot of people from testifying who would likely make him look very, very bad. Unfortunately for him, new information is coming out anyway.
Why wouldn't you want all relevant information to be produced at the Senate trial?
Get all your information and then send over the articles! You don't hold a trial with an ongoing investigation. Finish your case before sending it over.
They tried. Trump obstructed. Better late than never.
Would you feel the same way if the new evidence completely exonerated Trump? Or would you want someone falsely convicted rather than allowing new evidence?
On what possible basis is this a "late date"? The trial hasnt even started yet. Havent you ever seen Perry Mason or Matlock, or Law and Order? It is not uncommon at all on those shows for a witness to be found "late".
Since Trump wants the world to be a television show about him, new developments are very fitting.
And how many times should I answer that question? Tell us, how would you like to be on trial with the prosecutor having the investigation still open? That would be kind of chaotic, not to mention putting you in a very dangerous place.
He did NOT obstruct! He raised the issue of privilege. The Courts settle that dispute. The democrats couldn't wait, remember? They had to impeach by Christmas to appease their hate filled base!
Its flat out weird that Trumpsters think it is appropriate to bullrush a presidential impeachment past everyone.
What facts are they SO afraid of? All of them would be my guess.
How would you like to be innocent and have new evidence that would exonerate you ignored?
wait... isn't this exactly what the Democrats in the House did with the impeachment? They were in such a rush because getting the impeachment in was so important that they then sat on everything for a month...
Ah, there is a difference:
"Per the Brady v. Maryland decision, prosecutors have a duty to disclose exculpatory evidence even if not requested to do so. While the prosecution is not required to search for exculpatory evidence and must disclose only the evidence in its possession, custody, or control, the prosecution's duty is to disclose all information known to any member of its team, e.g., police, investigators, crime labs, et cetera. In Brady v. Maryland , the U.S. Supreme Court held that such a requirement follows from constitutional due process and is consistent with the prosecutor's duty to seek justice. [3]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exculpatory_evidence
Yep, got that. But this sham trial has been orchestrated to acquit Trump no matter if he's guilty, as clearly stated by the GOP. And since it's Trump's team that caused the obstruction in fact gathering, anyone who values truth should want the new evidence included.
But then, Trump worshippers don't seem to actually want a fair trial. They swallow the Trump koolaid that everything is so unfair to him, when he's brought all this on himself.
You, on the other hand, I would think would want a fair trial with all the relevant evidence presented. And this guy is a KEY witness.
The trial hasn't even taken place yet, BUT the House inquiry WAS a sham. It was a national disgrace.
And this guy is a KEY witness.
Who? The guy involved in all the shady deals now facing jail time? We would have to know if he has been promised anything by Adam Schiff? Do you really want to go there?
I really don't think you realize how the actions of democrats look to people.
Sounds very much like Perry Mason doesn't it?
Not even close to the national disgrace of Bill Clinton trying to argue the definition of the word"is", or trying to convince anyone that oral sex or a sexual act with a foreign object was not an extra marital affair.
Now that was a disgrace.
I really don't think you realize what all of the President's tweets look like to non hard core Republicans.
They are also a national disgrace.
Do they look anything like Post 7.2.6 ?
It's the Dems who keep moving the goal posts, hoping and praying that some "smoking gun" or "political bombshell" will somehow materialize out of thin air.
If they don't have clear and convincing evidence by now, there is none, and this left wing clown show will amount to naught.
Besides, perhaps the phone call was inappropriate, but certainly not an impeachable offense..
When you block people from testifying even though there are subpoenas and refuse to hand over documents, that is obstruction. Does Trump think one of his low level food chain thugs is going to remain silent to protect him? Of course this guy is going to spill his guts to try for a deal.
Nope, Not when it involves the President. He has a claim to executive privilege. Whether he does or not is up to the Court. Otherwise many presidents would have been charged with obstruction.
Of course this guy is going to spill his guts to try for a deal.
Spill or make things up? Whatever gets him out of jail.
7.2.6?
No.
You wish made up.
And more times than not, depending on who gets the evidence, one or the other asks for a recess and trial delay to afford themselves, and by law their opposition, the opportunity to see what is about to come to light. By law all evidence is to be exposed. There is not a gotcha provision.
He's been to all of the Cable news sites all day.....that is expect for Fox News.....Hum...I wonder why he never made it over there?
Fox isn't interested in having people on who are going to talk about crimes that Trump committed.
Actually Fox is the only one that has counter view points. They are the only ones who were right about the Russia-Collusion hoax and the Covington kids among other things. Funny, I thought you didn't watch that stuff?
Fox is a hack news station.
He always pulls this shit when yet another one of his pals is outed as a criminal.
Kellyanne can't even keep her lies straight..
Kellyanne Conway Melts Down Under Grilling by Fox News
White House counselor Kellyanne Conway was asked four times by Fox News on Thursday morning to “flat-out” refute claims from Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas that President Donald Trump was fully “aware” of what he was up to in Ukraine. She didn’t give a straight answer once.
Of course she didn't. Trump won't either when his fat ass is on the hot seat.
Lev Parnas = With all the trouble I'm in right now, I'm gonna save my own ass and tell them what they want to hear !
Even Uber politicians Pelosi and Schifty Schiff won't come out and say he's "Credible" when they're asked.
Their only response to that question is: "We'll have to wait and see" !
Wait and See ?
WTF !
Schifty Schiff had definitive "PROOF" since day one of the Liberal Trials. Was Lev Parnas one of those "fool proof evidence" thingies Schifty PROMISED he had ?
This STUPID coming from the "Left"....it's about to kill me.
Just kidding. I really think it's Hilarious !