Lev Parnas: Exclusive interview tonight at 9 - don't miss it Trumpsters.

[Mountain Man]

I guess I should have bolded the whole first paragraph? Parnas says he and Furman had a private meeting with the President and Guiliani, but in a meeting with only 4 people, how likely is it that they never spoke to one another? The topic was supposedly what he wanted Parnas to do...sorry, your argument seems far fetched at best. It seems clear that Parnas claimed at one time to have met privately with the President and Guiliani, only later to claim he had not.

Rather, CNN claims that Parnas told his "associates" that he met with the President.

[JimL]

Rather, CNN claims that Parnas told his "associates" that he met with the President.

He obviously met with the president on many occassions, there are many photographs showing that much.

[Mountain Man]

He obviously met with the president on many occassions, there are many photographs showing that much.

Oh, come on, don't play the equivocation game. We're clearly talking about a formal business meeting and not merely a photo-op at a party.

(I was about to suggest that you're smarter than that, but honestly, I'm not sure you are.)

[Cow Poke]

He obviously met with the president on many occassions, there are many photographs showing that much.

Actually, Jim, the way that works is that often there will be a line of people waiting their turn to do a photo op with the President (whoever he/she happens to be) and there's no actual "meeting".

Do any of these photos actually show them sitting down "meeting"?

[DivineOb]

I guess I should have bolded the whole first paragraph? Parnas says he and Furman had a private meeting with the President and Guiliani, but in a meeting with only 4 people, how likely is it that they never spoke to one another?

I've been in meetings in which I've been given tasks to do but not directly by the one suggesting the task.

Someone says to my boss: We should do X
My boss to me: Can you take the lead on that?

What I said was that the paragraph does not demand that he spoke to Trump. Surely you can see that. Parnas worked for Rudy who worked for Trump. It wasn't a meeting among equals.

The topic was supposedly what he wanted Parnas to do...sorry, your argument seems far fetched at best. It seems clear that Parnas claimed at one time to have met privately with the President and Guiliani, only later to claim he had not.

We don't know what the overall goal of the meeting was but the text you pasted does not suggest that the purpose of the meeting was to decide on what Parnas should do next, merely that that topic came up during the meeting.

Eventually, according to what Parnas told his confidants, the topic turned to Ukraine that night," the article continued. "According to those two confidants, Parnas said that 'the big guy,' as he sometimes referred to the President in conversation, talked about tasking him and Fruman with what Parnas described as 'a secret mission' to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter."

It doesn't read "the Resident tasked Parnas with" or "the Resident asked Parnas to go on a secret mission." In fact now that I reread the paragraph it doesn't even sound like the decision to go to Ukraine was finalized in that meeting, merely that the possibility of doing so was discussed.

Again, no PAS, just saying that before we can claim, with certainty, that Parnas's story has changed we need to know with certainty what his story was in the first place.

[JimL]

Oh, come on, don't play the equivocation game. We're clearly talking about a formal business meeting and not merely a photo-op at a party.

Well we don't know that it was just a photo op, the photo op is just that, a photo op. The fact is is that there are so many photo's of the two together at different events, along with photos of him with Ivanka, Jared and other members of the administration. It's not like he was just some stranger to them all. Whether they actual had a discussion, who knows at this point, but all of those photos of them together, at all of those events, at least suggest that they've probably talked. Further more, on top of that, being that we know that both he and Giuliani were working for the president why would we assume that he never met with him, never talked to him? What we should do is have him testify at the Senate trial and find out for sure. Whatya think?

[JimL]

Actually, Jim, the way that works is that often there will be a line of people waiting their turn to do a photo op with the President (whoever he/she happens to be) and there's no actual "meeting".

Do any of these photos actually show them sitting down "meeting"?

They're not going to publicise an actual meeting. Photo-ops would take place before or after any private meeting. Not saying they did have discussions, just that they've been together at numerous events, so it's not unlikely that they did..

[Cow Poke]

They're not going to publicise an actual meeting.

They do it all the time, Jim.

Photo-ops would take place before or after any private meeting.

Not necessarily, and not necessarily a meeting in which the photo op party was actually a party to the actual meeting.

Not saying they did have discussions, just that they've been together at numerous events, so it's not unlikely that they did..

You're working awfully hard to put him in an actual meeting, and neither you nor I know he was or was not.

I'll allow you to speculate further on this without me.