Concocting two articles of impeachment against 73-year-old President Donald Trump Dec. 13, 2019, Democrats said they had an ironclad case, not needing anything more to prove Trump committed high-crimes-and-misdemeanors. Parading a raft of cherry-picked witnesses to build their impeachment case against Trump, House Democrats led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerold Nadler (D-N.Y.) insisted that their impeachment case was complete, introducing two impeachment articles on (1) abuse of power and (2) obstruction of Congress. Democrats were 100% satisfied that they had an unassailable case against Trump. Days before the trial begins Tuesday, Jan. 21, Democrats and their media friends float a new star witness, 48-year-old Ukrainian-born businessman Lev Parnas.
Parnas and his business partner Igor Fruman were arrested Oct. 19, 2019 and charged with violating campaign finance laws, trying to buy-off U.S. politicians on their relations with Ukraine. Suddenly, Parnas becomes Democrats latest “whistleblower,” telling House investigators he had all the goods on Trump. Interviewed by rabidly anti-Trump MSNBC by Rachel Maddow Jan. 17, Parnas insisted he worked for Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. “President Trump knew exactly what was going on,” Parnas told Maddow, referring to White House attempts to dig up dirt on 77-year-old former Vice President Joe Biden and his 50-year-old son, Hunter. Democrats’ impeachment case against Trump pivots on Trump’s July 25, 2019 phone call with 40-year-old Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky. Democrats’ anonymous “whistleblower” claims Trump engaged in a quid pro quo with Zelensky.
Parnas said he was hired by Giuliani to dig up dirt on the Bidens, proving that Trump had a quid pro quo with Zelensky, offering him $391 million in military aid for dirt on the Bidens. That’s the crux of the Democrats’ impeachment case. Democrats insist Trump violated a Congressional act to release Ukraine’s funds, but, more importantly, sought to interfere in the 2020 presidential election. Joe Biden’s currently the Democrat front-runner for the eventual nomination. His son, Hunter, is not running for elective office. Transcripts of Trump’s July 25 call with Zelensky don’t specify which, if any, of the Biden’s Trump sought information. Contrary to Democrats’ and press accounts, Trump wanted to know about Hunter who earned millions from corrupt Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings. Joe has said Trump uses Hunter as a diversionary tactic.
Listening to Parnas’ interview with Maddow, it’s clear, if you can believe anything Parnas says, that Trump did want to ascertain the Bidens’ role in Ukraine’s corruption. Parnas puts his spin on Trump’s intent, saying he had no interest in exploring corruption. But since, in Trump’s mind, the Bidens were synonymous with corruption, it shows how Parnas is not a reliable witness. He’s clearly giving Democrats everything they want and more, even though the Bidens are at the center of Trump’s concerns about Ukrainian corruption. Joe has denied any wrongdoing by himself or Hunter, knowing Hunter made millions working on Burisma Holding’s board for three years. “He was aware of my movements. I wouldn’t do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani,” Parnas told Maddow, stretching the truth about Trump knowing what was going on with his efforts to get information in Ukraine.
Saying that Trump “was aware of his movements,” defies common sense, knowing Trump would be the last one paying attentions to details, certainly not his movements. Maybe Giuliani knew Parnas’ “movements” but certainly not Trump. Trump denied knowing Parnas, despite the former Ukrainian businessman insisting that he did. “I meet thousand and thousands of people as president. I take thousands of pictures,” Trump said, denying knowing Parnas. Parnas told Maddow that he was present when Trump attorney Victoria Toensing briefed Atty. Gen. William Barr about efforts to obtain information on the Bidens in Ukraine. Toensing posted on Twitter, Parnas “absolutely lied.” Democrats have a real problem with their new star witness heading into trial. Maddow coaxed as many damning statements from Parnas as possible in their Jan. 17 interview.
When Democrats face Trump’s attorneys it’s unlikely they’d want to put Parnas on the stand, knowing he’ll make them look pretty bad. Despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisting Republicans are involved in a cover-up, preventing new witnesses from coming forward, Parnas is deeply flawed. It’s doubtful that any new witnesses will testify in Trump’s impeachment hearings. Democrats know they’re about to have their heads handed to them in the impeachment trial. All the talk of new witnesses, or GOP efforts to suppress witnesses, are attempts by Democrats to appeal to voters once Trump is acquitted. Pelosi and her House managers led by Schiff are about to face their comeuppance in the Senate. Democrats know they’ll lose badly in the Senate but have decided that their best hope to damage Trump politically heading into 2020 is to call the Senate trial a sham.
