Victoria Toensing Slams ‘Liar’ Lev Parnas

5

Attorney Victoria Toensing slammed Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas as a liar after comments he made last night on Rachel Maddow’s conspiracy show.

Referring to the MSNBC interview Parnas had with Rachel Maddow, Toensing declared he had “absolutely lied” about happenings in Ukraine that purport to show that Trump, Barr, and others knew exactly what was going on.

Parnas claimed a meeting was requested by Giuliani with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and that Toensing would participate. Though the president’s personal lawyer told the Daily Beast this week that the letter “confirms that my role throughout was as a defense lawyer for the President seeking exculpatory evidence.”

Toensing’s law firm said through a spokesperson that they knew nothing of the letter or Giuliani’s alleged outreach to the Ukraine president.

The Soviet-born Parnas is not a credible person. He’s looking for his get out of jail free card. He claimed the Attorney General knew, but his spokesperson said that was 100% false. In addition, he said Vice President Pence, reporter John Solomon, Toensing’s husband Joe di Genova, also knew.

Vice President Pence said about Parans, “I don’t know the guy.”

PowerInbox

5 COMMENTS

  1. this is such BS…he has been arrested for making, get this, FALSE STATEMENTS AND LYING ABOUT IT, plus he got a million dollars from RUSSIA…notes without dates, I mean come on demoncraps, is this the best you can do?

  2. It’s another frame up. Watch how Mitch caters to it, allows evidence not covered in the House, and blocks Trump witnesses.

    • Trump gets HIS witnesses as part of the 6th Amendment. Going to be hard for Mcturtle or Chuckie or anyone else to justify that.

      When the First Congress considered the Compulsory Process Clause, there was little debate over its value, and it became part of the Sixth Amendment without opposition. The clause assured that the accused in a criminal case was guaranteed not only the right to call witnesses but also a process to obtain witnesses, so that defense evidence could be evaluated by a jury or, in a nonjury criminal case, by a judge. It was, in sum, an essential part of the right of an accused to present a defense.

  3. Once again, the schifforbrains when asked to verify the credibility of Parnas, he refused to answer.
    Veggie du. Sounds similar to all the accusations made by the schifforbrains since Trump arrived on the scene. Never any verification nor credible evidence of anything.
    Does everyone understand that the charges, and all the subsequent waste of taxpayer money and time, are based on a fictional account of the phone call between POTUS and the President of the Ukraine. As imagined by, and read aloud in front of congress, by none other than schifforbrains. If President Donald J. Trump had not released the actual transcript of the call, at almost the same time that schifforbrains was reading his version, this would be a bigger mess than it already is.
    Just sayin’.

Leave a Reply