The Parnas Family Wire Transfers Released In The Pues Lawsuit Reveal More Than You Think

Much of what we know about the details of the transactions at the heart of the indictment of Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman was revealed in the lawsuit Michael Pues brought against Parnas for a scam in which Parnas got Pues to invest in a movie project that never came about. Because Parnas owed Pues $500,000, Pues was able to obtain Parnas business and family financial records including wire transfer information. Back in June of this year, the Campaign Legal Center obtained those records and included them in its supplemental filing on their complaint about the $325,000 contribution Parnas and Fruman made to America First Action.

The wire transfer records, which include a full page of incoming transactions and a full page of outgoing transactions, can be found as exhibits at the end of this filing by CLC. An accompanying explainer by CLC gives us this background on how the transaction broke the law (GEP is Global Environmental Partners):

And those documents reveal that GEP never contributed to America First Action.

Wire transfer records show that another LLC managed by Parnas. Aaron Investments I, LLC, transferred $325,000 to America First Action on May 17, 2018. The super PAC never disclosed receiving money from Aaron Investments I, LLC—it instead attributed the contribution to GEP.

It is not clear why Parnas or Fruman asked America First Action to misattribute the contribution, nor is it clear why the super PAC went along with this scheme. But in doing so, America First Action violated the straw donor ban: it accepted a contribution from one entity, and reported it as having come from another entity.

The explainer also gives us this on how the funds came into Aaron Investments I, LLC:

Other wire transfer records show that just two days before making the super PAC contribution, Aaron Investments I, LLC received a $1.26 million transfer from the client trust account of a Miami real estate attorney named Russell S. Jacobs (the funds in a client trust account don’t belong to the attorney: they belong to the attorney’s client.) Absent that transfer, it appears that the LLC would not have had the funds to cover the $350,000 contribution.

So the money used for the contribution appears to have come from Jacobs’ client. We don’t know who that client is–but Jacobs, the real estate attorney, specializes in working with foreign real estate buyers and advising realtors on how to avoid federal requirements aimed at disclosure of foreign buyers who use shell companies to launder money through U.S. real estate.In 2016, for example, he hosted a seminar titled “Avoid the Treasury Trap with Foreign Buyers.”

And yes, when we look at the wire transfer records, we see $1,260.329.80 coming in to Aaron Investments I, LLC on May 15, 2018 from Jacobs:

Only two days later ,on May 17, is the transfer of $325,000 back out to America First Action:

But these records also show us two more transfers out of Aaron Investments I, LLC and five more coming into it. There is one more outgoing wire transfer, and it may be the most interesting. It is marked as coming from a personal account for Svetlana Parnas, who married Lev in 2012. The transaction occurred on May 11, or four days before the $1.26 million transfer came in. It is for $3556.75. The recipient is marked as Victor Imber:

That is a very interesting name. The Daily Beast was first to investigate the contribution to America First Action and this is what they found back on July 19 of 2018:

We end today’s edition with a mystery. Leading pro-Trump super PAC America First Action disclosed nearly $5 million in second-quarter contributions this week. Among its donors was a company called Global Energy Producers LLC (GEP). It donated $375,000 in May, putting the company among the deep-pocketed group’s top 20 donors. But there’s very little indication of what the company does or who’s behind it.

It appears that GEP was incorporated in April in Delaware, a notorious black hole for corporate disclosure. But FEC filings listed its address as a Boca Raton, Florida, property owned by someone named Victor Imber. The FEC has no record of the Russian-born Imber or GEP making any previous federal political contributions. Additional public records indicate that Imber may have rented the property to someone named Michael Braid, who likewise has no other apparent connections to the company or history of political contributions. Braid did not respond to questions about GEP. Numerous calls to Imber went unanswered.

Hmm. So six days before Victor Imber’s address was used as a false location for Global Energy Partners Producers in a false representation that GEP made the contribution to America First Action, Sevetlana Parnas wired Victor Imber a little over $3500. Perhaps that is the actual “rental” of this address that was going on. That stands out as pretty significant.

But there’s more! I’ve heard mention of money going back out to Igor Fruman’s company, and yes, there it is. A transfer of $490,000 went out to FD Import & Export on May 16, only one day after the big transfer came in and a day before the America First Action transfer went out:

It’s especially confusing for Fruman’s company to get money from Aaron Investments I, LLC, because Fruman never shows up in any of the corporate filings for it. For further interest, David Correia was originally the Registered Agent and eventually a member, but Lev Parnas filed a form with the state on October 2, 2017 removing Correia from the company and making Svetlana the Registered Agent. Parnas backdated the form to June 15.

Mysteriously, there’s also a transfer into Aaron Investments I, LLC from FD Import and Export for $11,500 on May 10, five days before the big transfer in from the real estate attorney:

Perhaps Parnas had some expenses in getting the large infusion of funds organized? The indictment describes the $1.26 million as coming from “a private lending transaction between Fruman and third parties”. Other reports in the media have said it was a private loan secured by property Fruman owns. At any rate, we can rest assured that the government knows who the third parties are and there’s a good chance we will find out once the case goes to trial. It should also be noted here that in other reports, Parnas has claimed the $1.26 million came from the sale of a condo.

Getting back to the rest of the wire transfers, we find another outgoing transfer on the same day as the funds going to Fruman’s company, May 17. This transfer is for $12,950 and went to JetSmarter, Inc. That company has been described as an Uber service for private aircraft. This could well be payment for one of the many trips Parnas and/or Fruman made. I’ve tried to see if that time coincides with any of the trips we’ve seen reported, but so far nothing:

But the choice of flight provider is very interesting. Virtually every name associated with JetSmarter is Russian. In 2017, the then-CEO, Edward Gennady Barsky, resigned when he was indicted for embezzling $11 million from the real estate investment company he had just left to come to JetSmarter. The current CEO, who is one of the founders, is Sergey Petrossov, who is only 30. His father spent 15 years in Russian prisons and is best friends with “Vyacheslav Ivankov, a.k.a. Yaponchik, who’s been called the John Gotti of the Russian mob and once had a crew of 100 soldiers in Brighton Beach”. Yes, that Brighton Beach, aka South Brooklyn, where Lev Parnas grew up and got his first job selling co-ops for Fred Trump. I’m pretty sure this isn’t the first time Ivankov’s name has come up in the stories about Parnas and Fruman.

The earliest transaction we see in the wire transfer records is on May 30, 2017. Since it is so far removed in time from these other events, I’m not going to put the name in here from whom the money came, but it was for $30,000 received into Aaron Investments I, LLC. The name is Russian and comes up on searches as a male in his mid-20’s living in South Florida. The name also turns up in an email address for a Toyota dealership’s Russian flyer, but not on that dealership’s current staff list. The name is also associated with a defunct LLC incorporated in January of 2018 and dissolved by the state last month. At any rate, that’s a lot of money for a kid in his mid-20’s to have if he’s also helping to sell Toyotas.

On December 18, 2017, we have income of $10,000 into Aaron Investments I, LLC from WeHold, LLC. The one person affiliated with this company, which is still active, appears to be quite active in commercial real estate.

The final three wire transfers, which all came into Aaron Investments I, LLC within an 18 day period in the middle of January, 2018, totaled $5,300. These transfers came from Aaron G. Parnas. Aaron Parnas is the son of Lev Parnas and would have been in the middle of his first year of law school at the time of these transfers:

Much about Aaron, Lev and Svetlana Parnas can be read here, where we learn that this summer, Aaron interned at the Miami office of Rudy Giuliani’s former law firm. He also managed to get his undergraduate degree simultaneously with his high school diploma, which enabled him to enter law school at the age of 18. He volunteered for the Trump campaign and has said he wants to be president some day.

We of course don’t know the source of these funds Aaron put into one of many entities his father named after him. Some were incorporated around the time Aaron was born. The money could be as innocent as birthday gifts from friends and family. Recall, though that the Parnas family was at that time actively avoiding paying the $500,000 awarded to Pues in the lawsuit. And to put those funds into an entity that was being used to break the law is not a good plan for someone wanting to be president. That is, unless that someone plans to mirror the path of Donald Trump and the illegal schemes Fred used to funnel money to Donald.

image_print
41 replies
  1. Michael says:

    Bravo! This is as excellent a sleuthing job as it is utterly frightening the level of Russian meddling going on. Besides the other links to the Trump orbit, the boy genius, son of Parnas, Aaron interned at Rudy “Nasferatu” Giuliani’s former law firm? I know guilt by association is not a crime but at some point you just have to say “Enough already!” _Everything_ Trump touches smells of stale vodka and putrid borscht.

    • Anvil Leucippus says:

      Having never interned at a law firm myself, can anyone elaborate on what that might entail? I assume not lawyering (sp?), but would you get your hands on any cool documents that might un-obfuscate the money laundering?

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      It is a summer apprenticeship. The work is mostly research and writing, running legal errands to courts and clerks’ offices, occasionally meeting a client. The work is supervised by a qualified lawyer, who is responsible for the work product and its use.

      It is practicing to become a lawyer. It is used as a recruiting tool for larger firms, and a way to get grunt work done at lower cost.

      It is often a way to network among members of an in-group: social, intellectual, or wealth peers; alumni; etc. It is also a way to do favors for them – I hire yours, you hire mine – without directly violating nepotism or similar rules.

  2. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Aaron Parnas earned his high school and undergraduate degrees at age 18? For comparison, Roy Cohn earned his undergraduate and law degrees from Columbia at the same time, at age 20. We have Roy Cohn levels of smart here, apparently put to similar purposes.

    • Anvil Leucippus says:

      So if he is interning at a law firm, and he is getting an undergraduate degree right out of high school, I assume he is then on the fast lane for law school?

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        A legal intern or law clerk is already attending law school. She has usually finished the first year, and more commonly the second (of three).

        Firms hire people who have or are not attending law school for office and administrative work, but do not call them law clerks.

        • bmaz says:

          At larger firms, also entails lots and lots of long lunches with the various lawyers at the firm. Seriously, it can consume a couple of hours every day.

          I will say this though, I could not stand that you didn’t really do anything, so I went to clerk for a couple of smaller criminal defense firms, where I not only got to do a lot of work, but also got to go to court on those cases. And that was during the school year too. Far better, and much more valuable, experience than the nothing the big firms give you, but the pay not as good.

          • Bay State Librul says:

            Looks like John Grisham can update his “Racketeer” novel with a foreign twist, circa 2022.
            “My name is Rudy, I am a lawyer, and I am in prison. It’s a long story.”
            Picking the wrong client and money laundering at its worst. It leads to indictment, impeachment and life sentence for treason.

                • bmaz says:

                  No, I am not kidding in the least. This has been explained repeatedly here, treason is NOT relevant or applicable, and it is a disservice to all to glibly bandy it about like it is.

                  I am not being an asshole, I am being honest. But, again, this has been explained here over and over and over. Relentlessly. But here you come.

                  For “treason”, there must be an active war against a declared enemy. Ukraine nor Russia, nor Turkey, nor anything else here fits that element. Here is a primer, for the three thousandth time, on why this is. I don’t have time to go back and cite all my advisories on this.

                  I am sick and tired of people spewing out this bullshit. Stop. If telling the truth makes me an asshole, then, fine, I am an asshole. But do not bandy that stupid shit about here.

                    • bmaz says:

                      Um, there is NO “non-technical” sense.

                      That is actually complete nonsense. Treason is the only crime spelled out in the Constitution, and the elements under it in statute. The bounds of it have been consistently defined and understood as such for all but people that wish to bandy it about falsely.

                      We do not do that here any more for “treason” than we do the idiotic and relentless claims of “RICO”. Yes, shocker, lawyers interpret laws and precedence.

                      Complete bullshit is complete bullshit. There is no reason to spread and propagate it, nor ever encourage the blithe same.

                • earlofhuntingdon says:

                  You’re using the Humpty-Dumpty theory of language: words mean what I choose them to mean, neither more nor less.

                  Treason in the US is very narrowly defined, for specific historical and good practical reasons.

                  • earlofhuntingdon says:

                    The M-W definition derives from English practice. The US specifically rejected its breadth. The Wiki entry attempts a global view. The US portion is reasonably accurate.

                  • David B Pittard says:

                    I hate to contribute to what seems tangential, but the article cited by bmaz makes assertions that there must be a congressionally declared war as context for treason as well as “active and direct participation in an armed conflict” as the definition of “levying war.” Aaron Burr was famously acquitted at trial for treason due to insufficient evidence but apparently not because of the lack of context or conduct. There was no declared war by congress at the time of the alleged treasonous acts of Burr.
                    Further, aside from “levying war,” one could be convicted of treason against the United States for another reason: “adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
                    18 US Code 2381 defines treason identically. Neither require a congressional declaration nor otherwise define what makes another country an “enemy” and it seems obvious that an enemy can be a non-state actor.
                    Court interpretations might apply, but as the means by which war is fought have changed with technological changes, and an expansion of both the understanding of enemy and levying may be warranted.
                    I see the wisdom of avoiding useless arguments about whether the term “treason” should be confined to the statute and constitution, but I think the common understanding of the term should not be disparaged, even if discouraged. It may well prevail in time, to apply with an updated understanding of the term “enemy.” To quote Shakespeare:
                    “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
                    By any other name would smell as sweet; rose by any other name is still a rose.”
                    Or Dylan: “You don’t need a weatherman
                    To know which way the wind blows.”

                  • David B Pittard says:

                    I hate to contribute to what seems tangential, but the article cited by bmaz makes assertions that there must be a congressionally declared war as context for treason as well as “active and direct participation in an armed conflict” as the definition of “levying war.” Aaron Burr was famously acquitted at trial for treason due to insufficient evidence but apparently not because of the lack of context or conduct. There was no declared war by congress at the time of the alleged treasonous acts of Burr.
                    Further, aside from “levying war,” one could be convicted of treason against the United States for another reason: “adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
                    18 US Code 2381 defines treason identically. Neither require a congressional declaration nor otherwise define what makes another country an “enemy” and it seems obvious that an enemy can be a non-state actor.
                    Court interpretations might apply, but as the means by which war is fought have changed with technological changes, a judicial expansion of both the understanding of enemy and levying may be warranted if even necessary.
                    I see the wisdom of avoiding useless arguments about whether the term “treason” should be confined to the statute and constitution, but I think the common understanding of the term should not be disparaged, even if discouraged. It may well prevail in time, to apply to Rudy G., with an updated understanding of the term “enemy.” To quote Shakespeare:
                    “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
                    By any other name would smell as sweet; rose by any other name is still a rose.”
                    Or Dylan: “You don’t need a weatherman
                    To know which way the wind blows.”

                    • bmaz says:

                      Ah yes, that argument has been made here, and other places, relentlessly. It is still beyond bogus. The “article cited by blaze” is exactly correct in every regard.and, no, ” the means by which war is fought have changed” is a nonsense argument.

                      Yes, “court interpretations” apply. And Steve Vladeck’s analysis is spot on. Law is not what you may think it ought be, it is what it is. And Steve is exactly right as to what it is. And the bandying about of the term “treason” because it makes people feel good is utter nonsense.

          • earlofhuntingdon says:

            Don’t forget the softball and cocktails. The entertainment and camaraderie disappear after you sign on the dotted line and pass the bar, not to reappear for years, or until you’re tapped to entertain the next round of summer interns.

  3. Geoff says:

    It’s truly mindboggling that Rudy thought it was a good idea to go in with the Russian and Ukrainian mobs. But I suppose that may just show his true character. Like attracts like. I guess that it also may show his level of financial desperation, or simply outright avarice and lack of a moral compass. Maybe he has always has been a fraud and a crook – it certainly seems many long time New Yorkers wouldn’t argue with this assessment. This always takes me back to NYC mayor days, when he was busting the mob. More and more, I have the feeling that he was working the mob then, or at least compromised by them partly. Makes perfect sense that Trump would tie himself to this crook. They are truly made for each other.

    • Bri2k says:

      Yes, Rudy has been a fraud and a crook for a long time now. Witness Bernie Kerick and the re-location of the emergency comms center to the WTC before 9/11 so it was close to Rudy’s mistress so he could have assignations.

  4. Savage Librarian says:

    Interestingly, public records indicate that Victor Imber is related to Larysa Waciega Moscow. She is 83, lives in Penn Valley, PA and is related to John Moscow. I wonder if he has any connection to the John Moscow of Baker Hostetler, the law firm that is connected to Bill Browder, Magnitsky, Natalia Veselnitskaya, Prevezon, Mark Cymrot, Rinat Akhmetshin, Lanny Wiles, and Glenn Simpson.

    Of course, it could be an entirely different John Moscow…

  5. Jenny says:

    Thanks Jim. Excellent detective work. Reading your post, I remembered Andrew McCabe’s book, The Threat: How the FBI Protects American in the Age of Terror and Trump.

    “I would spend the first ten years of my career focused on cases that grew out of two interlocking narratives: the evolution of organized crime in Russia and the export of Russian organized crime in the United States.” (page 34)

    “To be a made man in the Italian Mafia means being accepted into a family, in a bona fide induction ceremony – we’ve all seen the movies. The path to becoming a made man in Russia is different. The vor must have been to prison, done hard time, and declared himself a thief for life. People who live like that will, as a consequence, keep going back to prison. The more times the vor goes in and out of prison, the higher his status, which is written on his skin … Crosses on the knuckles indicate the number of times a man has served time in prison. Stars on the shoulders signify authority. The real leaders who emerge from the process are the vory v zakone.” (page 40)

    Definitions: vor means: thief and vory v zakone means: thieves-in-law

    • BG Pelaire says:

      Maybe the House IC should get McCabe in as an expert witness. They can do that one in public. Put up a big chart with Trump or Giuliani at the center.

  6. Bay State Librul says:

    Compromise on Treason.

    Let’s settle the score on t******

    Treason as defined by BMAZ and others – Treason in the first degree (declared war)
    Treason as defined by a wider definitional scope – Treason in the second degree (undeclared war/cyber war)

    • bmaz says:

      What a load of dishonest crap. BSL, I love you, but do not pull that crap here.

      It is beyond false and wrong, and it is a disservice to those that read here.

      That is not going to work, and it is wrong in a pretty sick way.

      • Bri2k says:

        You fixate on the most interesting things, Mr Maz.

        I much enjoyed your story above about your interning experience.

        My respect for you rose after reading that.

        Then you go fixate on this.

        Whatever you do, don’t read the comments over on TPM. You’ll have an apoplexy.

        By the way, what would you call selling out one’s country for a hotel?

        • bmaz says:

          Well, I fixate on what, hopefully, is correct legally. On the subject of “treason”, I can absolutely guarantee you, I am right.

          As to internship, I was lucky to figure it out very early, and lucky to have family friends who pointed me in a better direction (that I was already headed toward, but they helped me find great mentors). I was extremely fortunate, and will never forget what I learned as a result. It was, seriously, everything. That was how I became an actual trial lawyer. If I had been in a big firm, I would be very lucky to have had 10 real jury trials under my belt, and they would have been unsatisfying ones. That all worked out well, and I am truly thankful.

    • Rugger9 says:

      No, BSL, treason is defined in the US Constitution very specifically because of the abuse of the charge by our English common law predecessors.

  7. NorskieFlamethrower says:

    I want to know when people are gunna realize that Giuliani’s career was made in the last half of the 1980’s on the Mafia Commission Trial which ostensibly blew a hole in the Mafia large enough for Russian “entrepreneurs” to slither through. It’s hard, for me at least, not to believe that Russians and Russian money didn’t aide in that successful (dare I say it) RICO pogrom. I believe that Rudy has been owned by Russian cutthroats since his first years as NYC mayor. Both Rudy and the Dumpster have been owned by Russian investors since the early 90’s. We are now learning that the state of Florida thru the NRA and the Florida Republican Party have been a money laundering operation for a good while. When are we gunna wake up?!!

    • BeingThere says:

      That leads to an iteresting question, during that time did Rudy ever put any Russian mob up before the beak?

  8. David B Pittard says:

    BMAZ, I did not suggest that the law is what I would like it to be nor did I indicate what I would like it to be. The law is what the Supreme Court decides. The Supreme Court may and has overruled its own precedent. It cannot decide issues without cases brought and the rulings appealed. Reasonable arguments for the expansion or overruling of prior decisions must be made first in cases decided by lower courts. Such arguments originate in informed imagination produced by intellectual passion. Intellectual passion may be mistaken as emotional passion, leading to unfortunate disparagement.

    I based my comment about the possible further interpretations of Article III by the Supreme Court on current analyses by constitutioncenter.org and on law.cornell.edu, the latter of which states below the heading “Doubtful State of the Law of Treason Today”: The vacillation of Chief Justice Marshall between the Bollman and Burr cases and the vacillation of the Court in the Cramer and Haupt cases leave the law of treason in a somewhat doubtful condition.”

    Whether justified or not, arguments about and accusations of treason do not presently seem politically purposeful. I suggest that for now they be eschewed in favor of other crimes that are not burdened with the same emotional valence.

    • bmaz says:

      Couple of things: 1) “Article III” IS the Supreme Court. 2) “law.cornell.edu” is a publisher of pure statutes and does not reflect anything more than that. Can you provide a cite for the article from Cornell you claim was from them? Because it seems to be a blurb piece of garbage from an entirely different source, Justia, and have nothing to do with the state of law today and, frankly, were minority opinions that never prevailed in any day. You will need a LOT better than that to overcome Steve’s arguments. And I know for a fact you don’t have it and cannot find it.

  9. Bay State Librul says:

    Let’s keep it light

    The “Word Nazi” in a one act play
    With a little help from Larry Thomas

    In line at the Wheel House

    BSL: I’ll have a bowl of turkey soup
    BSL (complaining): Hey, you forgot the bread
    BMAZ: TWO DOLLARS!
    BSL: (amazed) What the fuck?
    BMAZ: THREE DOLLARS!
    BSL: (distraught) But, it’s free
    BMAZ: NEXT!

    I concede. I will not use treason as a noun.
    Better usage….. Don the Con has engaged in treacherous behavior.
    Disclaimer:This is only a joke.

Comments are closed.