"In October the government bypassed the normal visa process and gave a type of extraordinary permission to enter the country called immigration parole," Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Monteleoni was quoted in the court transcript as saying. "That's a discretionary act that the statute allows the attorney general to do in extraordinary circumstances. In this case, we did that so that Mr. Katsyv could testify. And we made the further accommodation of allowing his Russian lawyer into the country to assist."
Homeland Security confirms special entry for Russian lawyer - 07/14/17
If that is accurate, she was not personally a witness, rather a lawyer for a witness.
See too: How did Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya get into U.S. for Trump Tower meeting? - November 6, 2017
On the same day as the Trump Tower meeting, Veselnitskaya attended oral arguments at the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the U.S. government's forfeiture case against the Cyprus-based real estate holding company Prevezon, which prosecutors accused of laundering some of the proceeds of a $230 million Russian tax fraud scheme. Prevezon has U.S. lawyers in the forfeiture action but Veselnitskaya represents Prevezon owner Denis Katsyv, a Russian businessman. ...Veselnitskaya, however, wasn't admitted into the U.S. in June 2016 because of her role in the Prevezon case. In fact, then U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of Manhattan specifically refused Veselnitskaya's request that the Justice Department authorize her trip via a mechanism known as immigration parole, which allows the attorney general to temporarily suspend immigration requirements on a case-by-case basis.
Bharara's office has recommended immigration paroles for Veselnitskaya on three occasions, when her client, Katsyv, was being deposed in the U.S. in the Prevezon case. But in March 2016, Bharara's office said no. In a letter to Prevezon's U.S. lawyers, prosecutors said such paroles aren't appropriate for foreign lawyers asking to help U.S. counsel prepare for appellate arguments or to attend appellate proceedings. "Since neither Katsyv nor Veselnitskaya are required to appear as witnesses in person at this stage of proceedings, we do not believe that immigration parole is appropriate," the since-fired U.S. attorney wrote.
thanks for the info still cloudy someone pulled strings, maybe AG Lynch that would be fantastic! or they could be playing on words and she was entered on parole as an informant not a witness....will have to follow this to its conclusion
thanks for the info still cloudy someone pulled strings, maybe AG Lynch that would be fantastic! or they could be playing on words and she was entered on parole as an informant not a witness....will have to follow this to its conclusion
thanks for the info still cloudy someone pulled strings, maybe AG Lynch that would be fantastic! or they could be playing on words and she was entered on parole as an informant not a witness....will have to follow this to its conclusion
thanks for the info still cloudy someone pulled strings, maybe AG Lynch that would be fantastic! or they could be playing on words and she was entered on parole as an informant not a witness....will have to follow this to its conclusion