Adam Schiff may have ‘mischaracterized’ Parnas evidence

  A man named Lev Parnas has been in the news quite a bit over the last couple of weeks because of some text messages. If I am not mistaken this is supposedly new evidence against the President that was not included during the impeachment hearing. This is supposed to be pretty damning evidence and the left has jumped all over it.

  But now, according to this report from the left-leaning Politico, Adam Schiff might have “mischaracterized” this evidence. Here is more:

House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff appears to have mischaracterized a text message exchange between two players in the Ukraine saga, according to documents obtained by POLITICO — a possible error the GOP will likely criticize as another example of the Democrats’ rushed effort to impeach President Donald Trump.

  Don’t you just love the way the article says the Republicans will use this new report to attack the Democrats rather than admitting this does call into question some of the truthfulness of the evidence which is being used in an attempt to remove the President from office? But anyway, here is more:

The issue arose when Schiff (D-Calif.) sent a letter to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) last week summarizing a trove of evidence from Lev Parnas, an indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. In one section of the letter, Schiff claims that Parnas “continued to try to arrange a meeting with President Zelensky,” citing a specific text message exchange where Parnas tells Giuliani: “trying to get us mr Z.” The remainder of the exchange — which was attached to Schiff’s letter — was redacted.

But an unredacted version of the exchange shows that several days later, Parnas sent Giuliani a word document that appears to show notes from an interview with Mykola Zlochevsky, the founder of Burisma, followed by a text message to Giuliani that states: “mr Z answers my brother.” That suggests Parnas was referring to Zlochevsky not Zelensky.

The word document contains a series of questions and answers, but doesn’t identify who is doing the asking or answering. Yet the questions center on the hiring practices at Burisma, while the responses include statements such as “we wanted to build Burisma as [an] international company” and “we also thought it would help in Ukraine to have strong international board figures,” which seems to point to Zlochevsky — not the Ukrainian president — as the respondent.

  So let me see if I have this right: Adam Schiff sent a letter to Jerry Nadler about some evidence, some of which was redacted, claiming to summarize the evidence. But when the texts were then unredacted it turns out they were not about the same person Adam Schiff claimed they were about. This does not sound like a “micharacterization” to me, it sounds like an outright and intentional lie.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium