With Media Focused On Rachel Maddow, Neal Katyal States That Evidence Compels A Real Senate Trial

[ancianita]

[YOHABLO]

1. Parnas met with Anderson Cooper as well. Why Rachael getting accolades?

[ancianita]

2. I can think of a few reasons, but most journalists would have better ones, probably.

My take:

First, her questions are probably better, due to her book, Blowout, showing the depth of her understanding geopolitics and Ukraine.

Second, because her presenting the interview over two days provides both breadth and depth of facts from a key evidentiary witness. Perhaps Parnas' lawyer, Bondi, saw a greater benefit to Parnas' staying safe because of Maddow's broadcast plan.

Why even put them into competition? CNN has its audience; MSNBC has its audience.

Ratings have shown Rachel's audience to be the bigger one for a long time. If exposure to the truth is the goal here, then both audiences benefit, right?

[YOHABLO]

3. Makes no difference to me. Parnas's chirping is all that matters.

[ancianita]

4. Right. In the end it's all that matters.

[jalan48]

5. Of course we should have a real Senate trial, but we won't get it. There will be endless

analysis by the media of how important this is and when it's over it will be on to the next big, viewership grabbing story. How quickly we forgot our faith in Mueller who would save the country.