General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsbabylonsister
(171,070 posts)Rachel earned all the props she's getting, and she did it with such knowledge and finesse!
calimary
(81,304 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,733 posts)the devil in others.
Upthevibe
(8,052 posts)She is......I can't imagine the amount of work, plus her book, plus she had that foot injury.....
SlogginThroughIt
(1,977 posts)God didn't do shit. She has worked her ass off in her career and because of that she is where she is with the ability to report the way she does.
erlewyne
(1,115 posts)Thanks, SlogginThroughIt.
We should give credit where credit is due.
EW
malaise
(269,046 posts)Traildogbob
(8,748 posts)God created this shit show, HE sent trump here. As per his self proclaimed spokespeople.. Think he will admit a mistake.......yea, just like Trump would. God, trump and white Evilgelical hypochristians are what is destroying the country. And One brilliant Gay Woman may take em all down. How poetic. See, God really gonna hate gays now.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)GemDigger
(4,305 posts)that said God sent Trump. That's how I took it.
Aussie105
(5,401 posts)asking Him who he sent, Trump or Maddow.
But the line went dead before he could answer. Phone service around here isn't too good. lol
wnylib
(21,484 posts)Sounded to me more like a metaphor to emphasize the greatness of Maddow"s efforts and achievement than a statement of literal belief.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)RVN VET71
(2,692 posts)'Course "God" didn't do anything. But it's a warm and heartfelt tribute to Rachel, and a nice ironic thumbing of the nose to Falwell and Graham and other Fascist Televangelical mega-millionaires and their bigoted homophobia.
(Best depiction I've read of "God" was by Mary Shelley in her novel depicting a god-like Victor Frankenstein running away from his creation who is, thereby, forced to fend for itself, resulting in the poor bewildered creature suffering and battling in agony with its darker side.)
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Stuart G
(38,434 posts)Before that Rachel was on a network radio show. ..Guess who else was on that radio show?
Al Franken that is who.
.......That network radio show was...are you ready?..Ed Schultz's Show
90-percent
(6,829 posts)to Keith and Al. Patriotic American's who have a knack for doing and saying things THAT CHANGE THE COURSE OF AMERICAN HISTORY.
-90% Jimmy
ahlnord
(91 posts)Rachel hosted a radio show on Air America with Lizz Winstead (creator of The Daily Show), called "Unfiltered."
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)Was sorry to see that outlet go. Lots of great progressives on that station.
oldsoftie
(12,555 posts)I remember listening to her try to wrangle the other 2 co hosts, who werent radio people or journalists. I always thought she should have HER own show.
wnylib
(21,484 posts)current state of affairs in the nation and the world.
wendyb-NC
(3,327 posts)A very fine messenger!
Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)lunatica
(53,410 posts)go on her show. Theyre scared of her after a few went on initially. This is a fact. She repeatedly invites them and they never take her up on it.
YessirAtsaFact
(2,064 posts)Republicans invited to her show who refused to appear
oldsoftie
(12,555 posts)And he said "Show me where she's asked Jim Jordan or Mccarthy....." And i couldnt find any proof of what i was telling him. He was talking about how Pelosi & others wont go on Hannity
Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)spout nothing but lies and disinformation.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Ive reached that state of simply not subjecting myself to the unapologetic and rampant lies anymore. They should just be cut off at the knees after the first utterance. Their mikes should be turned off and they should be forced to leave if they dont leave nicely.
Period. Enough is enough. Let the MAGATs scream all they want because their voices can also be muted.
Marthe48
(16,974 posts)Last edited Thu Jan 16, 2020, 01:05 PM - Edit history (1)
named and charged with campaign fraud. She called them Dumb and Dumber and other mocking names.
I wonder if she was doing that to mask her interest in getting this interview? Mr. Parnas must be a good sport to overlook her initial opinion of him and his work for trump.
Sometimes I'm sorry I have such a good memory :/
maddiemom
(5,106 posts)is good-natured (if sometimes "pointed" ; not at all like Trump's mocking, which is always cruel.
Marthe48
(16,974 posts)I heard say refer to Parnas, Fruman and guiliani as the Three Amigos. So in my aging brain, that might be what I thinking of. The interview was outstanding, and it was entered into the Congressional Record.
2Legit
(90 posts)Of all of the people Lev Parnas could have chosen to interview him, he chose Rachel. Why? Because he knew that she would not interject her own bias and would ask intelligent questions and stick with the facts. Period. His interview with her wasn't going to have any grandstanding for ratings. She has been following the intricacies of many stories involving Trump and Russia since before the election and took a lot of shit for it at times. Now, most of them are bearing major fruit. This woman knows what she is doing and she is Must-See TV at my house every night at 8:00 p.m. CST and sometimes again at 11:00 p.m. They should just give her the Emmy already for this one. BTW, did anyone else think that Lev's lawyer was creepy? He just stared stone faced at Rachel the whole time. It was odd. I wonder if he was really cool with the interview and praying that it was going to keep his client alive. We are living in such messy times.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)somewhere in the background. He looks the same way in those clips. I think it must be his natural look. It is creepy though.
napi21
(45,806 posts)it would be on today.
shanti
(21,675 posts)I'm watching the 2nd part of Rachel's interview tonight.
oldsoftie
(12,555 posts)Although there are those messages, which are dated well before any of this came up. I think.....
PandoraAwakened
(905 posts)Last edited Sun Jan 19, 2020, 07:26 AM - Edit history (1)
Parnas' indictment is directly related to laundering foreign money into tRump's campaign interference shenanigans in Ukraine, including $1 million from a Russian bank account. In other words, his crimes are all wrapped up in the same nutshell tRump is being impeached for.
Contrast this with Michael Cohen: His crimes (at least the ones he was charged with) were about campaign finance violations regarding Stormy Daniels, personal tax evasion, and personal bank fraud.
While Cohen testified about a sprinkling of tRump insurance and bank fraud and, of course, the Stormy issue, there was no way he was ever going to give up the goods about tRump's decades-long Russian and Ukranian money laundering. Why? Because doing so would mean taking down members of his own family (on both Cohen's side and his wife's side) who are deeply entrenched in the Russian mafia here in America as well as in sketchy enterprises in the Ukraine.
Needless to say, there was just no freaking way Cohen was ever going to testify against his father-in-law, his uncle, his cousins, his own brother, and his brother's father-in-law (who BTW, died in Ukraine under suspicious circumstances a day after media reports came out about his role in a backchanneled "peace plan" through Michael Flynn that would cede control of the Crimea to Putin). And that doesn't even count his relatives' business associates who are some straight-up scary oligarchs.
Remember when Cohen gave a flurry of interviews after it was known that he was no longer on team tRump's side? Remember how he would say over and over again that he had to put his "family" first? What family did you think he was signaling to with those interviews? This is why SDNY wouldn't cut any deals with him. He couldn't give them tRump because he wouldn't give them his relatives who have been laundering money through tRump for decades.
Bringing all this back to Parnas, how does it compare? I think Parnas (who also has connections with both the Russian mob and corrupt Ukranians) has analyzed what happened with Cohen. As already seen with the SDNY, the only way he gets to cut a deal with them is by giving up some mobsters higher up the food chain. Maybe Firtash would be enough, maybe not. Perhaps, as with Cohen, it would be safer to just go to trial and take the couple years (or less) prison sentence. But then again, there's always the Epstein factor to worry about when going that route.
That brings us to what's going down now. If I had to guess, I think Parnas is first trying to make a play for Congressional immunity in exchange for tRump. Don't know if it will work out that way, but it's probably worth a shot.
Thus, the media blitz in advance to try to put certain Rethug senators in a box who are also on the take from the Russians. Notice how Lev has signaled from the get-go that he's implicating everyone from top down, but he stops short in naming senators. Yet, he throws in a representative, Devin Nunes, as a warning shot. The smart move would be to leverage compromised senators who have their fingers in the rubles till into letting him testify with immunity in exchange for keeping their names out of it. Not saying this would at all be ethical, but, hey, I think we all know we aren't dealing with any Boy Scouts in this lot.
Anyway, that's where my head went when I started applying game theory to the whole scenario.
Any additional thoughts?
yellowdogintexas
(22,264 posts)and he started talking about that attorney with TRex. They also call him creepy. It was hilarious.
Marthe48
(16,974 posts)I am not watching as much as I was. I need a break, but if I am going to watch, I watch TRMS, and then Lawrence O'Donnell. I need tobe able to sleep :/
I think Parnas looks like Peter Lorre. I saw Parnas's lawyer, but didn't notice how he acted.
duforsure
(11,885 posts)To give the American people the facts makes me think of Edward Morrow and Walter Cronkite, both legends as is our Rachel Maddow . Her interview will be remember as one of he greatest we've ever seen and heard in our history, and she deserves all the awards possibly given to her. Thank you Rachel, you deserve all that comes to you for this.
TheBlackAdder
(28,208 posts).
She doesn't talk to people before she starts her show so she maintains focus.
Her whole crew are just fantastic people. At the time, the Morning Joe green room, where guests wait to go on her show, was also shared by her show and Lawrence O'Donnell's. It was about as wide as your arms extended outward, and about 12-14 feet deep with a small mini fridge and counter at the far end and a love seat to the right side, a chair and a TV over the doorway. I was surprised how small it was, like a repurposed broom closet.
.
Piasladic
(1,160 posts)I would love to see a live taping.
yaesu
(8,020 posts)as they let her. There are maybe 2 people in the biz I would trust with my life & she is one.
Cyrano
(15,041 posts)back her up and help her put it all together.
Every journalism course taught in all universities should have Rachel as one of their prime examples of integrity, intelligence, honesty, hard work and just sheer, stick to it grit.
Oh, and by the way, I love you, Rachel. America is badly in need of an army of real journalists like you.
gademocrat7
(10,659 posts)samplegirl
(11,480 posts)gordianot
(15,238 posts)Clearly she has worked on this for sometime and deserves credit on this story. Brilliant journalism getting the Parnas interview was not luck. One for the history books. Writing a book which includes identification of Firtash is more than sheer fate and comes close to divine intervention. Angel indeed!
demigoddess
(6,641 posts)For all we know, that is exactly what He did.
Thekaspervote
(32,773 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Public Policy BA from Stanford
Rhodes Scholar
DPhil in Politics from Oxford
20 year career in broadcasting, rising to host one of the most watched Cable news programs.
Author
Columnist
Mulitple Emmy awards
All self-made
But Gawd did it.
Sid
Dem2theMax
(9,651 posts)And Isn't it nice hearing the truth? Keep going Rachel!
IcyPeas
(21,885 posts)how long it was in the works. It sounded like he didn't even know about it?
then again, maybe he asked it to let us, the viewers, know.
Texin
(2,596 posts)But Parnas - guilty as he's said he is - also should get some credit here. Rachel was on this for weeks, but most of it, whether she would be able to get this done, depended on whether the prosecutors in his case would release Parnas's electronic devices and transmittals. Saving that, she and Parnas would not have been able to sit down together for that bombshell interview. He was telling her that they were slammin' to get those communications downloaded and sent to her. It was all last minute, according to both of them. I'm just grateful that they were able to make it happen while and before McConnell could do anything but receive the Articles.
Maybe that angel does need to be thanked -- but it begs the question whether we actually deserve to be saved.
dewsgirl
(14,961 posts)Karadeniz
(22,535 posts)Amaryllis
(9,524 posts)lillypaddle
(9,580 posts)Lighten up, people.
Mersky
(4,982 posts)Love it
Praise Jesus, ya'll. Amen and other big words.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Collimator
(1,639 posts). . .from which all existence is derived.
I'm not really comfortable speaking on Her behalf, but I sense that She digs Maddow.
I_UndergroundPanther
(12,480 posts)She is America's best reporter.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)She has been researching Trump/Russia for literally years now. She knows her stuff on this. She has pointed out a lot of stuff about Trump corruption through the years, and often it goes under the radar and hardly anyone else talks about it.
She knows her stuff.
NCLefty
(3,678 posts)Norbert
(6,040 posts)Sort of a fallen angel, aren't ya. What happened to your wings?
-James Stewart
Capperdan
(492 posts)Maybe he doesn't want to call attention to her