Why isn't this news?

CNN leads with news of the Russian govt resigning along with headlines about the debate and while there is an article about Lev Parnas' notes on Ritz Carlton stationary - the fact that trump said "she is going to go through some things" and it looks like he really tried to facilitate that should have been bigger news IMHO

This is so serious that any prudent newspaper or media would want to take the time to get responses and to do some additional investigation. If this is what it seems, this is beyond anything Nixon did and unforgivable. If the problem with an ambassador was foreign policy, the President would simply recall her/him. This was NOT even for his perception of American interests - it was for his personal political reasons.

In Watergate, Nixon did not order the breakin, but he did create the paranoid mindset where people reporting to him took that action .. and he covered it up. Here, he clearly gave Guiliani the charge to get dirt on the Bidens. We KNOW that the ambassador was pulled out on an emergency basis because she was told she was in danger. Though I will predict that Guiliani and/or his guys will be the scapegoats, the fact is THEY COVERED THIS UP. When the State Department pulled her out, if they knew even the details already out yesterday, they should have had an investigation of those Americans.

So why the caution? This is the silver bullet if it is proven. It is better if it comes out with every i dotted and every t crossed. An inadvertent even insignificant error would be what Trump et al would try to latch onto to claim that ALL of it is wrong.

What is clear is that this should be investigated by the House.

This seems a reasonable explanation. I'm not quite a patient person.

Thanks

Caused by information overload.

The Tennis ball machine of Bullsh*t has been running non-stop for 3 years.


But her threat is getting noticed. Cream tends to rise.

All headlines should read "A HIT ON AN AMERICAN AMBASSADOR WAS BEING DISCUSSED BY TRUMP ASSOCIATES". There is no other way to interpret those texts. News should run with it. Any legal action in response invites discovery.

On actual television news as opposed to website? I haven't watched a news program since 2008.

It's also on the WaPo website front page.

Then how can you say it isn't news? If you don't watch the news, you don't see the news. It was in my morning paper, on the CBS morning news, and everywhere I looked when I went back online this morning. Yesterday afternoon and evening, it was all over DU, with links to news sources.

If you want to know what is on the news, you'll have to look at the news. Don't just come here and tell us it's not on the news. How would you know?

I'm sorry, but I don't know you, nor your level of knowledge about what is going on. It appears that you are deliberately avoiding learning what is going on, but very willing to share what you don't know here. Not a good look, really.

Sorry but there are other ways to "see" the news as opposed to television. Like the internet? I read all day, everyday. In fact I made mention of it in my original post. Before bed, in the middle of night, and upon awakening. BTW I've been a member here since the beginning. Lost my sign in information in 2009? And had no need to redo whole thing, since I can READ here everyday regardless.

More Parnus documents had been released....Yovanovitch's lawyer wants to know why she was being followed....

They then showed a democratic congressman answering a question about validity of the new documents and he said he has to consider the source. A crook's recollections are not believable.

By your own admission you said you haven't watched news since 2008, so why would you rail about it not being covered?

Up at 2am scanning headlines online, up again at 7 checked websites again. No news. You do realize not everyone chooses to watch TV?

This one's going to be all about the realtime documentation turned over to the House in the form of 3 phones, letters, and apparently video as well. Read yesterday that it's 90,000 pages worth of documentation. Yesterday's dump to the public was 38 pages.

this guy's mental health is questionable so perhaps they're being cautious.

https://politicalwire.com/2020/01/15/new-ukraine-scandal-figure-was-taken-into-police-custody/
A New Ukraine Scandal Figure Emerges
January 15, 2020 at 9:05 am EST By Taegan Goddard

Robert Hyde, the new mystery player in the Ukraine scandal who was “secretly monitoring” the whereabouts of ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, was taken into police custody at a Trump resort last year, Mother Jones reports.

He claimed the Secret Service and a hit man were after him and was later “involuntarily confined in a medical facility.”

The Daily Beast has more on Hyde, who is now a congressional candidate.

for 45 minutes, I had assumed they would lead with it.

Daytime news, doesn't hold a candle to evening news.

crime, Dimitri Firt*sh?

How is it that all the anti-US, clandestine Ukraine BS that has gone on that benefits only Russia and Trump has Russian m*b fingerprints all over it, but what I'm reading today only refers to Parnas as a 'fixer' or a Giuliani 'associate'?? At this point, the Ukraine case is clear and I don't understand the continual refusal to paint the bigger picture re Russia...or at least point out that there are many, many connections that need to be better understood??

Maybe your TV is broken or something.

Online and tv.

shitless about this because of potential legal ramifications if they say one wrong word given the "mental state" argument about Hyde being spun to them by attorneys.

Note that this morning's broadcast media is using passive language like she was being "surveiled," "followed," etc., without presenting actual wording from the Whatsapp messages about the "price" that would be required by the inside man/men who were stalking her.

What this indicates is that MSM had no previous inkling of the contents of what Parnas turned over to the House and they're going to be scrambling all day to vet what's coming out and to try to dig up more background info.

Most of all, the broadcasters will be praying fervently that the New York Times or the Washington Post does the deep-dive legwork on this, preferably before prime time hits, so they can simply repeat what the papers are saying without running the legal risks.

As they say...stay tuned!

or at least have enough that the journalist could make the point that the House, with access to subpoenas should investigate this.

Thanks for posting this thread.