Giuliani Associates Parnas And Fruman Plead Not Guilty, Raise Executive Privilege Concerns

Lev Parnas reads a brief statement to the press as he exits federal court following an arraignment hearing on October 23, 2019 in New York City. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

NEW YORK — Two of the key players in Rudy Giuliani’s efforts to dig up dirt on Trump’s enemies pleaded not guilty in Manhattan Federal Court Wednesday — and embraced the President and his approach to dealing with legal issues.

In their first appearance in court, Lev Parnas’ attorney Edward MacMahon told a federal judge that their case may involve executive privilege concerns. MacMahon said that, because Parnas works for Rudy Giuliani, and Giuliani works for President Trump, the case may raise issues that would require the Department of Justice or its Office of Legal Counsel to get involved.

And while MacMahon repeated that he could “not invoke that,” referring to executive privilege, he emphasized that given Parnas’ work with the President’s personal lawyer, there were potential attorney client and executive privilege issues raised by the government’s “voluminous” discovery.

The lawyer also said that Parnas had been using Giuliani as his own attorney, while also working for him.

MacMahon added that perhaps the issue could be resolved by the Department of Justice or its Office of Legal Counsel.

“He did not work for the U.S. government,” MacMahon noted. “He worked for Mr. Giuliani, who worked for the President.”

It’s not clear that the White House has made any assertion of executive privilege.

When U.S. District Judge Paul Oetken gave prosecutors a chance to respond, Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebekah Donaleski said that it was “the first time we’ve heard this issue from defense counsel.”

“Now is not the forum to litigate that issue,” she added.

Donaleski added to Judge Oetken that more than 12 search warrants had been served on physical locations and electronic devices in the probe, as well as more than 12 phone numbers.

In a statement after the hearing, Parnas said he would be vindicated and his lawyer, picking up on a White House rallying cry, accusing the government of orchestrating high-level leaks.

McMahon also noted that Parnas’s attorney in the House investigation, John Dowd, had raised executive and attorney client privilege concerns in letters to Congress.

McMahon’s statement is the first time that Rudy Giuliani’s name has been invoked in the case. Donaleski described the government’s investigation as “ongoing” on Wednesday, while separate reporting has suggested that federal prosecutors are examining Giuliani’s financial dealings.

The issue is particularly explosive in part because of work Parnas was reportedly doing for the legal team of Ukrainian gas oligarch Dmitry Firtash, who is stranded in Vienna as he awaits extradition to face federal foreign bribery charges in Chicago.

It’s not clear the extent to which Giuliani was involved in that representation. McMahon’s declaration threatens to weave a web of privilege assertions that could end up extending from the President through his lawyer and onwards to an indicted Ukrainian oligarch that prosecutors have described as an “upper-echelon” associate of Russian organized crime.

Parnas and Igor Fruman were charged with two other defendants in a scheme to funnel foreign money to political committees associated with Republican candidates.

The two defendants spoke little at the hearing. Parnas issued his not guilty plea in a nasal Brooklyn accent, while Fruman stayed away from the mic, speaking softly in Russian-inflected English.

David Correia and Andrey Kukushkin, the two other defendants, were arrested earlier this month and pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy last Thursday.

Parnas and Fruman allegedly participated in a scheme to hide the source of a $325,000 contribution to a pro-Trump super PAC and to get around legal limits on donations to a candidate.

With Correia and Kukushkin, they also allegedly participated in a scheme to funnel money from a Russian pot investor to candidates for state-level offices in Nevada, part of a plan to get marijuana retail licenses.

The two have popped up throughout Giuliani’s efforts to dig up dirt in Ukraine that may aide Trump in the 2020 election. The indictment touches on Parnas and Fruman’s efforts to get Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch fired, an effort they mounted, according to the indictment, partly “at the request of one or more Ukrainian government officials.”

The indictment, however, does not explicitly touch on the duo’s work with Giuliani, or Parnas’ recently reported role in connecting two pro-Trump lawyers to Firtash, whose legal team, in turn, provided a key document that Giuliani used to allege wrongdoing by Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

This story has been updated to correct the spelling of Parnas’s attorney’s name.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. The attorney said that, because Parnas works for Rudy Giuliani, and Giuliani works for Trump, the case may raise issues of executive privilege.

    Huh. Is executive privilege transitive???

  2. Avatar for ghost ghost says:

    Oh please. Oh f’ing please. This is just stupid now.

    Giuliani does not work for the White House or the Executive branch. He (maybe) works for Trump personally. There is no executive privilege between them, much less extending to Frick and Frack.

  3. Avatar for dwward dwward says:

    Earlier reports suggested they may raise attorney client privilege based upon their work for Rudy who worked for Trump. Evidently, they decided against this, although executive privilege seems even more harebrained and desperate.

    But it is fun to see they are truly desperate. At least we’ve got this.

  4. Avatar for ur ur says:

    Uh, yeah guys, that’s not how any of this works.

  5. I was under the impression that EP was thrown out the window when committing a crime.
    Parnas paid Giuliani $500K and donated $325K, so who is employing who?
    How far down the pecking order does EP extend to employees? The janitor?

    This sounds ridiculous.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

200 more replies

Participants

Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for cervantes Avatar for commiedearest Avatar for economides Avatar for becca656 Avatar for rick Avatar for chelsea530 Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for moreyampersand Avatar for khaaannn Avatar for pine Avatar for schmed Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for tena Avatar for rickjones Avatar for castor_troy Avatar for redhand Avatar for felirene Avatar for zillacop Avatar for zenicetus Avatar for emiliano4 Avatar for kovie Avatar for Bri2k Avatar for Swan

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: