Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Parnas' attorney just blew it all up...implicated Barr, Pence, Graham, Pompeo, Perry and others [View all]gratuitous
(82,849 posts)21. Parnas' information was bottled up by the judge in his criminal case
Parnas' documents seized by the government in his criminal case were sealed by the court. Parnas petitioned the court to release his documents on (near as I can tell) December 2, 2019. The court didn't release Parnas' documents in time to be included in the impeachment inquiry, but shortly after the articles were passed and referred to the Senate. I don't know if the court delayed releasing Parnas' documents until it would be too late, or if the timing was coincidental or what.
As for Bolton, he had his information all along so he could write his book. I don't know what hi$ motivation might have been for keeping quiet all thi$ time.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
52 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Parnas' attorney just blew it all up...implicated Barr, Pence, Graham, Pompeo, Perry and others [View all]
brush
Jan 2020
OP
There's a difference? Thanks, but it doesn't fit the context in the reply very well. n/t
rzemanfl
Jan 2020
#32
Can you imagine how powerful this would have been if it was being recited before the House
jalan48
Jan 2020
#12
I get that neither Parnas or Bolton were ready to testify when the House closed its inquiry. I
jalan48
Jan 2020
#22
Yes, there were no certainties. I'm sure our strategy will be debated in the years to come.
jalan48
Jan 2020
#29
Yes eleven months is a long time for Trump to have the pressure of impeachment hanging over him.
jalan48
Jan 2020
#30
repug courts-judges control tne process, they could drag it out until after the election.
brush
Jan 2020
#35
repug courts-judges control tne process, they could drag it out until after the election.
brush
Jan 2020
#34
We were in control. We could stop the process anytime we wanted. Judges didn't control that.
jalan48
Jan 2020
#36
And the Republicans also control the Presidency and the Senate. All we control is the House.
jalan48
Jan 2020
#39
Yes, courts could old up ruling on subpoeas until after the election and then who would care?
brush
Jan 2020
#44
I don't know why they closed it when they did. It seems it would have been better to wait awhile and
jalan48
Jan 2020
#25
nah, repug courts-judges control the process, they could drag it out until after the election.
brush
Jan 2020
#33
Because now that the Senate has all but voted to crown themselves a goddamn KING,
Volaris
Jan 2020
#40
That's what we have left. I hope it happens but then I thought Mueller would get Trump.
jalan48
Jan 2020
#42
If folks are running Political Dead Pools, perhaps it's time to recalculate who will be next! 🤔
TheBlackAdder
Jan 2020
#16
Won't matter. All Trump has to do is say "Yeah we did all that, in the best interest of America."
Still In Wisconsin
Jan 2020
#14
Correct. But if any Republican loses the MAGA vote they lose their election.
Still In Wisconsin
Jan 2020
#48
THIS !!!! This is the bet democrats and the rest of America lovers are making. Now its time for
uponit7771
Jan 2020
#20