Quantcast
Connect with us

Indicted Giuliani associate Parnas identified himself as ‘friend of Trump’ at private 2016 election night party: report

Published

on

According to a report from Politico, one of the two men taken into custody for campaign finance violations — and who has been connected to President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani — made an appearance at a private 2016 Election Night party and identified himself as a friend of the then-Republican presidential nominee.

Noting that Trump has distanced himself from Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who were both arrested attempting to flee the country two days ago, the report suggests his relationship with at least one of them may go back three years.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In fact, Lev Parnas described himself to a foreign correspondent at the cash-bar event in midtown Manhattan as a friend of the president-elect who didn’t live far from his South Florida winter home,” Politico reports, based on an item in Le Figaro, France’s oldest daily newspaper.

The report goes on to state, “Parnas arrived at Trump’s November 2016 election night party, which was held in a ballroom at the Midtown Hilton, with two other men in suits and their heavily made-up wives.”

“The Ukrainian-born businessman told the paper that a friend from his hometown of Boca Raton, Fla., had hosted several fundraising events for Trump and that his daughter had traveled around the state singing on the candidate’s behalf. It is not clear what friend Parnas was referring to,” Politico reports, adding, “The new detail connecting Trump and Parnas at the same election night party in November 2016 raises fresh questions about the president’s insistence that he doesn’t know the Ukrainian-born businessman. It comes amid a rapidly unspooling investigation that appears headed for a House vote to impeach the president.”

You can read more here.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

 

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

‘Stay out of the way’: Fox News sources say Justice Roberts will let GOPers win tie votes on witnesses

Published

on

Chief Justice John Roberts is expected not to weigh in heavily during the question and answer phase of the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.

As the trial moves to the new phase on Wednesday, Roberts has the option of "inserting himself" into the process to rule on questions or other matters, according to Fox News correspondent Chad Pergram.

But sources told the Fox News reporter that Roberts will follow the model of former Chief Justice William Rehnquist who presided over President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial in 1999.

Under the Senate rules, measures that do not receive a majority of votes fail. So if a Senate vote of witnesses was tied 50-50, the measure would not pass. Roberts could choose to break the tie but he is not expected to do so.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Ex-Trump chief of staff John Kelly: ‘I believe’ John Bolton and the Senate ‘should hear’ from him

Published

on

John Kelly, a former chief of staff to President Donald Trump, told a crowd in Sarasota, Florida on Tuesday that he believes former national security adviser John Bolton's claim that Trump directly linked releasing military aid to Ukraine with launching investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden.

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports that Kelly told an audience at a Ringling College Library Association Town Hall lecture that Bolton is a reliable source and should be heard out if reporting about his upcoming book is accurate.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Law professor who studied under Alan Dershowitz shreds his ‘shockingly wrong’ case against impeaching Trump

Published

on

Aya Gruber, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School who studied under Trump impeachment attorney Alan Dershowitz at Harvard, had some uncharitable words to say about her former professor's argument against impeaching the president.

"Dershowitz was my criminal law prof, and he was a good one," Gruber writes on Twitter. "But as a crim law prof myself, I can say his motive argument (Congress shouldn't examine the internal motives of POTUS so long he could have had a good reason for withholding aid) is shockingly wrong."

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image