• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Giuliani associate details how Trump fired ambassador for badmouthing him

Mar 18, 2018
2,281
1,805
385
Why are you defending this guy so aggressively?
Stop using lies and wishful thinking to remove the big bads. Don’t use hyper partisan tactics that subvert the republic. Stop acting like your day dreams are facts and hard evidence.

Then I’ll stop calling out nonsense and stand right there with you shouting at ol Trump. Until then, your cat lady technique will go opposed.
 

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,107
985
555
You're actually doubling on this?

Just becuase you take a photo with someone doesn't mean you intimately know them.
Ok, man. Let's just assume you're right and Trump has no idea who he is. All those photos and videos with him and other WH officials were all done at charity events and Trump takes pictures with lots of guys and can't remember them all. Let's assume he still doesn't know who he is even though in the email above his attorney would have had to have briefed him about who Parnas was.

Looking at that email which is actually a conflict waiver from Trump permitting Dowd to represent Parnas, ask yourself how Sekulow and Dowd would know that Parnas posed a conflict with Trump regarding Ukraine? Remember that Parnas and Fruman were only indicated for campaign finance violations--not for anything regarding their actions in Ukraine. It's logical to conclude that they did know what was going on and Parnas would rat out Trump in order to protect himself. If Trump had no connection to Parnas, there would be no need for the conflict waiver at all.
 

Hotspurr

Member
Jan 27, 2018
1,197
1,322
450
Stop using lies and wishful thinking to remove the big bads. Don’t use hyper partisan tactics that subvert the republic. Stop acting like your day dreams are facts and hard evidence.

Then I’ll stop calling out nonsense and stand right there with you shouting at ol Trump. Until then, your cat lady technique will go opposed.
So all the witness testimonies, phone transcripts, released emails and messages, Rudy's own admissions, admission by his own chief of staff on live television didn't do anything for you? You probably thought Hillary Clinton was a saint too then ;)
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
30,539
39,805
1,170
So all the witness testimonies, phone transcripts, released emails and messages, Rudy's own admissions, admission by his own chief of staff on live television didn't do anything for you? You probably thought Hillary Clinton was a saint too then ;)
You mean one of the heads of the very Establishment running this clown show?

We have come full circle.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: oagboghi2

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
758
152
1,470
So an ambassador goes around talking smack about her boss to random people and then when the boss finds out he fires her?

He is the head of the executive branch. He can fire ambassadors at will. Doesn't even need a reason. Could just be I fired her because it is Wednesday and I hate strawberry jam.

If you have a subordinate that goes around and telling people that you, the boss, will be fired, you bet your ass that that subordinate will be let go on the spot.


Steele Dossier v2.0 no one cares any more.
Is there any evidence that this ambassador was bad mouthing Trump? The many witnesses during the intelligence committee hearings stated she was an excellent ambassador who fought corruption. The people who hated her were the corrupt people. Those witnesses described her treatment as a smear campaign.
 

Hotspurr

Member
Jan 27, 2018
1,197
1,322
450
Is there any evidence that this ambassador was bad mouthing Trump? The many witnesses during the intelligence committee hearings stated she was an excellent ambassador who fought corruption. The people who hated her were the corrupt people. Those witnesses described her treatment as a smear campaign.
That's one thing I didn't understand, did Parnas lie to Trump, or did she actually badmouth him. Or, did the smear campaign convince Parnas that she was badmouthing him.

It seems to me that the smear campaign regardless of scenario may have been Rudy's doing of which the president was unaware of. Maybe Rudy understood that firing Yavanovich for nothing would look suspicious on Trump, hence he needed the smear campaign and Trump would have plausible deniability. It seems a lot of what Trump does falls under plausible deniability but here I actually might believe him haha...
 

Zangiefy360

Cross Forum Drama ..........Queen
Aug 30, 2018
1,180
2,150
510
Is there something wrong with CNN all of a sudden?

They're a reputable outlet.

It's not like they're Fox.
All of the sudden? Well, maybe from the left's perspective:

CNN’s Debate Performance Was Villainous and Shameful
The 24-hour network combines a naked political hit with a cynical ploy for ratings

 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
30,539
39,805
1,170
  • Like
Reactions: SpartanN92

Woo-Fu

incest on the subway
Jan 2, 2007
14,906
2,156
1,515
CNN gets hate because their agenda has become even more obvious than that of Fox News.

CNN used to be my primary news site, but after years of nothing but hyperbole about Trump I had to switch to the BBC to get my US news which is kind of hilarious when you think about it. I'm doing the same thing most Iranians with Internet access do because we can't trust our own news services.
 
Last edited:

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,107
985
555
So either Nunes has rogue staffers or he lied about not knowing Parnas



What reason is there to trust Parnas?
There’s very little reason to trust his words. What I will trust are verified documents he releases though
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hotspurr

Hotspurr

Member
Jan 27, 2018
1,197
1,322
450
So either Nunes has rogue staffers or he lied about not knowing Parnas





There’s very little reason to trust his words. What I will trust are verified documents he releases though
Surprise surprise. And look, John Solomon is there too, that guy everyone was frothing over who came up with his own imaginary alternate timeline that ended up being complete BS.
It's like every day there is a new piece of evidence released that further connects all the dots and yet some people would rather stick their heads in the sand.

 

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
758
152
1,470
Surprise surprise. And look, John Solomon is there too, that guy everyone was frothing over who came up with his own imaginary alternate timeline that ended up being complete BS.
It's like every day there is a new piece of evidence released that further connects all the dots and yet some people would rather stick their heads in the sand.

Is the belief now that every witness, every associate, all evidence are lies and only the president is telling the truth? How does that work? This is all just a liberal plot?
 

Hotspurr

Member
Jan 27, 2018
1,197
1,322
450
Is the belief now that every witness, every associate, all evidence are lies and only the president is telling the truth? How does that work? This is all just a liberal plot?
Basically. That's how you know they have no real defence.
 

accel

Member
Sep 11, 2015
897
395
520
So either Nunes has rogue staffers or he lied about not knowing Parnas
How do you go from Nunes staffer texting Lev Parnas to "Nunes lied about not knowing Parnas" ??? Nunes is not his staffer, right?

Further, to Hotspurr - what's wrong with Solomon communicating with Parnas? Would it not speak to Solomon being better informed in what he writes?

I am sorry, I just don't understand the logic of you both here. And I am baffled at the constant attempts to up the rhetoric which makes no sense on close inspection. Why do it?
 

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,107
985
555
How do you go from Nunes staffer texting Lev Parnas to "Nunes lied about not knowing Parnas" ??? Nunes is not his staffer, right?

Further, to Hotspurr - what's wrong with Solomon communicating with Parnas? Would it not speak to Solomon being better informed in what he writes?

I am sorry, I just don't understand the logic of you both here. And I am baffled at the constant attempts to up the rhetoric which makes no sense on close inspection. Why do it?
did you even read that one sentence you questioned me on? I said he either he has a ROGUE staffer who is doing things on his or her own without the direction from Nunes OR Nunes lied about knowing Parnas given that the staffer was likely taking orders from Nunes. These concepts are not hard to understand.
 

Ornlu

Member
Oct 31, 2018
2,116
2,730
495
And Trump not knowing about Parnas and Rudy's associates who were trying to put the squeeze on Ukraine? please, you'd have to be missing a few chromosomes to keep believing the lying sack of orange manure.
Maybe you could donate your extra chromosome to those in need?
 

accel

Member
Sep 11, 2015
897
395
520
did you even read that one sentence you questioned me on? I said he either he has a ROGUE staffer who is doing things on his or her own without the direction from Nunes OR Nunes lied about knowing Parnas given that the staffer was likely taking orders from Nunes. These concepts are not hard to understand.
Yes, I read that sentence of yours. It contains a logical fail. Nunes may NOT have a rogue staffer, his staffers may be doing things with his consent. And at the same time Nunes may NOT know who the hell Parnas is. He may know him as "some Ukrainian guy, not particularly important".

Your "either or" is illogical. It's like saying you are either blonde or younger than 20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepEnigma

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,107
985
555
Yes, I read that sentence of yours. It contains a logical fail. Nunes may NOT have a rogue staffer, his staffers may be doing things with his consent. And at the same time Nunes may NOT know who the hell Parnas is. He may know him as "some Ukrainian guy, not particularly important".

Your "either or" is illogical. It's like saying you are either blonde or younger than 20.
right. The third defense: they’re incompetent. They’ve been playing that card for a while now.
 

accel

Member
Sep 11, 2015
897
395
520
right. The third defense: they’re incompetent. They’ve been playing that card for a while now.
That's exactly the reverse of incompetent, that's competent. That's how people who have to communicate with lots of other people and have lots of staff operate. They split things into levels, delegate lower levels and operate on higher ones. Because otherwise nothing will get done, because there's just too much stuff to care about.
 
Last edited: