Trump Impeachment: Meet The Cannabis Law Expert Repping Lev Parnas

/ Featured, Headlining, Lawyers / / By
Lev parnas lawfuel josephbondy

The Trump impeachment trial is occupying gigabytes of media bandwidth, but one of the surprise witnesses is Russian-born Lev Parnas who was questioned on Prime Time about his allegations, the man beside him was something of a mystery.

Parnas, an associate of Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani, is being advised by Joseph Bondy, whose law firm website touts him as a criminal defense and cannabist business attorney. (Pictured above with the spectacles).

Parnas has alleged that President Donald Trump, U.S. Attorney General William Barr and others were fully aware of his work in Ukraine to secure the announcement of an investigation into Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden, using aid appropriated by Congress as leverage.

Despite Trump denials about even knowing Parnas, Bondy has been releasing pictures showing his client with various members of the Trump family, including Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner as well as the president and his two, elder sons.

Bondy had previously posted photos of Parnas with Giuliani, Vice President Mike Pence, House Republican Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Some of the images were accompanied by M.C. Hammer’s “U Can’t Touch This” as background music.

Who Is Joseph Bondy?

Law.com reported that Bondy was an attorney “with variegated and colorful legal expertise”, identifying a few facts that will help you get to know an attorney in the news:

  • Bondy is a Manhattan-based criminal defense and cannabis business attorney who has been practicing for more than two decades.
  • Named by High Times magazine as “one of the nation’s preeminent cannabis attorneys,” Bondy recently won two CBD processing licenses for clients in New York State’s highly competitive application process, and secured a settlement on behalf of a group of cannabis investors.
  • He is also a member of the pro bono legal team in Washington v. Barr, a pending lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of federal cannabis laws.
  • A native New Yorker, Bondy is a graduate of Columbia University and Brooklyn Law School, and currently serves on the faculty of Cardozo Law School’s Intensive Trial Advocacy Program.

The Trump impeachment trial promises some high interest in the various machinations of Trump’s dealings over the Ukraine business with his own high-powered legal team. Lev Parnas’ involvement however will prove one of the central pieces of intrigue in the unfolding drama.

Other Legal Posts on LawFuel

Read More

Swarbrick’s “OK, Boomer” Makes The US Supreme Court, No Less

/ Headlining NZ, New Zealand Law News, US Law / January 20, 2020 / By
Swarbrick

MP Chloe Swarbrick’s “OK, Boomer” snipe may have reverberated around the world but until now it had not also reverberated around the lofty chamber of the US Supreme Court.

[adrotate banner=”89″]

Chief Justice John Roberts (right) is a busy man now with his impeachment trial of Donald Trump proceeding, but the “OK Boomer” reference came just 12 days before the Chief Justice turns 65.

Roberts dropped the meme in questions in a case about age discrimination in the workplace.

“The hiring person, who’s younger, says, ‘OK, Boomer,’ once to the applicant,” Roberts said as he conjured a hypothetical exchange to try to figure out when an older federal employee might be able to win a lawsuit under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

It was the first time, according to databases of high court arguments, the somewhat pejorative phrase used by younger people to criticize the less flexible, tolerant and tech-savvy ways of their elders has been uttered in the Supreme Court, where the nine justices range in age from 52 (Neil Gorsuch) to 86 (Ruth Bader Ginsburg).

Apart from Roberts’ boomer reference, 81-year-old Justice Stephen Breyer made reference to a supervisor who was considering candidates for promotion. “I certainly don’t want people who are over the age of 82,” Breyer said, prompting laughter in the courtroom and on the bench.

The justices were considering the case of a Veterans Affairs Department employee who was in her early 50s when she sued for age discrimination after being denied promotions and training opportunities.

[adrotate banner=”85″]

Latest LawFuel Posts

About The Author

lawfuel
LawFuell's editors select and publish the most relevant and up-to-date information about lawyers and law firms for LawFuel on a daily basis from the most reputable and independent sources available.
Built with Kit