Parnas document release details Giuliani-arranged surveillance, possible threat to Amb. Yovanovitch (2 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

This thread of the Parnas documents seems to deserve its own discussion apart from the impeachment thread. Yovanovitch has called on the State Department to investigate, and Secretary Pompeo has yet to address the disturbing matter.

In the document trove released yesterday, it appears that Giuliani's Ukraine activities included arranging surveillance of U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch through Lev Parnas and Robert F. Hyde, a Trump donor and now Republican candidate for Congress in Connecticut. The documents reveal the detail to which Yovanovitch was under surveillance and the exchanges (mostly from WhatsApp) suggest that actors were prepared to harm Yovanovitch.

In November, Yovanovitch testified that shortly after these exchanges, she was urged to immediately return to the United States for her own physical safety - advice that she heeded an returned the next day.

 

[wardorican]

Forgive me if I don't follow your point although I do agree it's too bad that nobody that supports Trump seems to want to defend the specific acts in question rather, preferring to obfuscate, shuck and resort to process or character defenses.

It is not unhinged to wonder if when there are numerous little fires there might also be smoke. And, it is certainly not poor form to point it out in conversation on a political discussion board.

It's ok. I get in my head sometimes and think about patterns of discussion over time. there is a part of me that doesn't even want to get into this, but...

The point of this site is to elevate political discussions and keep things civil. That means, more direct, conversational, dialogue creating posting. I've seen a concentrated effort by most to elevate conversation. I think most of us get annoyed with the petty partisan bickering and parroted talking points. We want to discuss meaningful points.

Over the years, I've seen a few posters ignore the more substantial and thoughtful replies to their points, and just go after ones easy for them to mock. Some of us just can't ignore a good opportunity to rip into something, others maybe do it to avoid critical thinking or backing down on a point. I dunno.

So, When I saw these exchanges....

You just called me unhinged.

As much as I could care less about it, it's rude and inaccurate.

There are texts that show them to be monitoring her whereabouts at a time when Trump is openly suggesting she's going to be enduring tough times. My god, she was recalled as an emergency by her superiors for a reason.

Why? Is asking the question about all these bits of smoke really "unhinged" or is deluding ones' self into believing everything from Trump is true?

A comment to Archies Ghost

Where do you get the "assassination narrative" stuff?

Does it come from WND or The Blaze or something?

Perhaps from you when you suggested it could be a conspiracy to "harm" the Ambassador. But also people on this board.

If you took from my post an "assassination narrative" then you misread the post and ignored the actual intent.

Perhaps that explains the direct insult you included.

So, he avoided answering your question, which seemed like a fair question, but then decided to answer for another to seemingly come off a bit snarky. These are the things that can derail a thread. It's just sad, especially when it comes from posters who I know are very intelligent and have some legitimate gripes and concerns. I prefer it when we have legitimate discussions and disagreements. Not when either side starts to get too cute with facts or storylines.

And, just like the TDS garbage, Snowflake, etc.. now just having honest questions about something is "unhinged". does the Media, or some on the left become "unhinged" on some issues? Sure. But that line really loses its luster when thrown around casually.

Just like how the GOP today isn't really conservative. Maybe we shouldn't use that word so casually either. It's not accurate.

 

[wardorican]

This is the Friendliest interpretation of the interview, I'd imagine. Even here, look about half way in..

Giuliani associate nixes Dems' suggestions diplomat was stalked -- but claims to implicate Trump, Pence

Lev Parnas, the indicted associate of President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, on Wednesday night undercut House Democrats' explosive new suggestion that the Trump team had former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch under surveillance -- saying in a televised interview that text...

www.foxnews.com

So, I'd rather the thread not be about the side bar.. so, I posted the Fox article, because I thought it would be the most tempered version of this story, and it's still somewhat problematic to Trump and Giuliani.

 

[SaintForLife]

Whatever Parnas has claimed could be true, but considering his history of fraud and other dishonest practices the left might be setting themselves up for a fall once again. He sure seems an awful lot like Cohen, you know the one who was in Prague.

 

[SaintForLife]

She is actually a good interviewer. She lets her subjects talk, and has a way of getting good material out without inserting herself into the interview.

You know she's been exposed as a fraud after the whole Russiagate right? She's basically the left wing version of Alex Jones.

 

[wardorican]

Whatever Parnas has claimed could be true, but considering his history of fraud and other dishonest practices the left might be setting themselves up for a fall once again. He sure seems an awful lot like Cohen, you know the one who was in Prague.

Less about his claims and more about his Whatsapp conversations.

 

[dtc]

So, I'd rather the thread not be about the side bar.. so, I posted the Fox article, because I thought it would be the most tempered version of this story, and it's still somewhat problematic to Trump and Giuliani.

I watched the Maddow show and interview cover to cover. IF the FOX takeaway is that Parnas undermined the Ds attempt to portray an assassination conspiracy against the ambassador then it overlooked the 99% of real info.

If Parnas isn't 100% full of it, he burned down half the administration. And if they vote not to hear live witnesses after all that's come out, our nation is doomed.

 

[dtc]

You know she's been exposed as a fraud after the whole Russiagate right? She's basically the left wing version of Alex Jones.

Do tell?

 

[TaylorB]

So, I'd rather the thread not be about the side bar.. so, I posted the Fox article, because I thought it would be the most tempered version of this story, and it's still somewhat problematic to Trump and Giuliani.

The maneuvering this writer does to downplay the significance of the Parnas interview is really something to behold. The quotes about Hyde and there being no surveillance are treated as gospel (and made up the entire headline and lede), but when Parnas implicates Trump, Barr, Pence, et al. we’re reminded that he is not credible, seeking a plea deal, and offering information we already knew.

I’d love to know what aspects of this interview Bolton (or other evidence) is able to confirm. I don’t buy his explanation for the surveillance texts given the specificity from Hyde, the time period of his contact with Hyde, and the State Dept’s decision to remove her so quickly. I get that Hyde is a weird dude, but that’s such a bizarre topic to joke about via text. Hard to say how much energy Dems should expend trying to explore that further. Maybe Yavanovitch’s devices could reveal whether or not they were hacked. I’m wondering whether Pegasus or some similar spying tech could be detected forensically.

The most memorable claim IMO was the specific discussion about the Pence inauguration visit being canceled. I was surprised when he suggested the withholding of aid was an idea that Trump proposed long after the initial influence campaign on Zelensky had been unsuccessful. It was new info to me that the POTUS visit and support would have been more valuable to Ukraine than the aid itself. Zelensky’s initial resistance to Trump’s demands appear to have led to his more desperate act of withholding the aid, which ultimately caused this whole plot to unravel. Bolton and Giuliani could certainly help clarify all of this.

 

[V Chip]

I can see that there will be a substantial faction of people who say this is proof that Trump tried to kill the Ambassador, and they will run with it.

I'm late to this, but wanted to say...

I'm 100% certain that if the everything were exactly the same except people involved were the associates/administration under the name Clinton instead of Trump, that exact scenario would be ALL over right-wing media and Yavanovich's name added to the "attempted" part of the Clinton body count list.

 

[MT15]

You know she's been exposed as a fraud after the whole Russiagate right? She's basically the left wing version of Alex Jones.

you have some pretty extreme views and this one is a doozy.

 

[MT15]

Whatever Parnas has claimed could be true, but considering his history of fraud and other dishonest practices the left might be setting themselves up for a fall once again. He sure seems an awful lot like Cohen, you know the one who was in Prague.

this is a confusing statement. Cohen never claimed he was in Prague, that was apparently disinformation. And Cohen appears to have stopped lying since he has renounced Trump, you know, the person who instructed him to break campaign finance laws and then lie about it. Also the person who instructed Cohen to lie about the Trump Tower Moscow Project.

Of course we should be skeptical of Parnas, but he does bring documents and text messages. Let’s hear from Bolton. Heck, let’s hear from everyone. I’d love to hear testimony from Pence, Pompeo, Trump, etc. etc. It appears that they’ve all been lying to us.

 

[TaylorB]

Whatever Parnas has claimed could be true, but considering his history of fraud and other dishonest practices the left might be setting themselves up for a fall once again. He sure seems an awful lot like Cohen, you know the one who was in Prague.

I‘m happy to discuss the credibility of Parnas’ particular claims with you but I’m not going to keep engaging the left/right bias deflection every time a potential bad fact comes out. Nearly all the witnesses who break ranks with Trump have major credibility issues because that’s a job prerequisite for being “in the loop.” We’re left having to try to corroborate their testimony with documents and other evidence, which can have mixed success given their often extensive efforts to conceal what they’re doing (btw they sure do seem to love WhatsApp).

What did you find was/wasn’t credible? My initial take is in my last post. I‘m not particularly hung up on the surveillance because although that part of the storyline is potentially explosive, his detailing of specific involvement of the other individuals in the story was compelling and for the most part, if true, should be able to be corroborated with other testimony or documents or just the circumstances, if we are allowed to ask the witnesses about it under oath.

 

[superchuck500]

Uh yeah - that’s not really how it works.

 

[The moose]

Pretty quick to open this investigation!

Ukraine probing possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador | CNN Politics

Police in Ukraine are investigating the possible surveillance of former US Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, the country’s Interior Ministry announced Thursday.

www.cnn.com

 

[dtc]

Pretty quick to open this investigation!

Ukraine probing possible surveillance of ex-US ambassador | CNN Politics

Police in Ukraine are investigating the possible surveillance of former US Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, the country’s Interior Ministry announced Thursday.

www.cnn.com

So, instead of opening up Trump's investigation of Biden nonsense, they're going to open an investigation into Trump and his clown posse.

That's maybe the greatest instance of turnabout I've ever heard of.

 

[TaylorB]

I won't pretend to know much about the inner workings of federal prosecutors' offices, but I found the SDNY's apparent willingness to assist in the disclosure of Parnas' info to be intriguing. If Parnas reaches any sort of plea deal (or even if not), you've got to think Rudy Giuliani has a great deal of heartburn about being indicted by SDNY for failing to register as a foreign agent of Ukraine at a minimum. The plot to take down Yovanovitch appears to have involved his lobbying of the US government at Lutsenko's request in exchange for whatever "dirt" Lutsenko was withholding -- which means Rudy was doing unregistered lobbying on behalf of a Ukrainian gov't official before even discussing the crazy Firtash angle.

The fact that he hasn't been indicted under FARA yet makes me wonder whether that relates to other potential Rudy crimes they were reportedly investigating. Again, I'm certainly no expert in criminal law, and I've been wrong predicting indictments before so I won't do it here, but Giuliani was so sloppy about all this, it's hard to imagine he skates on everything. It's certainly worth keeping an eye on SDNY while this plays out.

 

[wardorican]

I won't pretend to know much about the inner workings of federal prosecutors' offices, but I found the SDNY's apparent willingness to assist in the disclosure of Parnas' info to be intriguing. If Parnas reaches any sort of plea deal (or even if not), you've got to think Rudy Giuliani has a great deal of heartburn about being indicted by SDNY for failing to register as a foreign agent of Ukraine at a minimum. The plot to take down Yovanovitch appears to have involved his lobbying of the US government at Lutsenko's request in exchange for whatever "dirt" Lutsenko was withholding -- which means Rudy was doing unregistered lobbying on behalf of a Ukrainian gov't official before even discussing the crazy Firtash angle.

The fact that he hasn't been indicted under FARA yet makes me wonder whether that relates to other potential Rudy crimes they were reportedly investigating. Again, I'm certainly no expert in criminal law, and I've been wrong predicting indictments before so I won't do it here, but Giuliani was so sloppy about all this, it's hard to imagine he skates on everything. It's certainly worth keeping an eye on SDNY while this plays out.

Trump sure surrounds himself with the best people.

This might be the second personal lawyer taking the fall.

 

[insidejob]

Not going to lie, this whole Parnas/Yovanovitch/Giuliani/#1 thing reads like a crime novel. The only difference being that they use things like What'sApp because it's "encrypted" instead of using actual PGP encryption so that the messages can't be read without the key. I guess it'd be more like an episode of "World's Dumbest Criminals" actually.