Ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort guilty on 8 charges
Paul Manafort, the longtime political operative who for months led Donald Trump’s successful presidential campaign, was found guilty of eight financial crimes in the first trial victory of the special counsel investigation into the president’s associates. A judge declared a mistrial Tuesday on 10 other counts the jury could not agree on. The verdict was part of a stunning one-two punch of bad news for the White House, coming as the president’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, was pleading guilty in New York to campaign finance charges arising from hush money payments made to two women who say they had sexual relationships with Trump. WHAT HAPPENED IN COURT? The jury returned the decision after deliberating four days on tax and bank fraud charges against Manafort, who led Trump’s election effort during a crucial stretch of 2016, including as he clinched the Republican nomination and during the party’s convention. Manafort, who appeared jovial earlier in the day amid signs the jury was struggling in its deliberations, focused intently on the jury as the clerk read off the charges. He stared blankly at the defense table, then looked up, expressionless, as the judge finished thanking the jury. “Mr. Manafort is disappointed of not getting acquittals all the way through or a complete hung jury on all counts,” said defense lawyer Kevin Downing. He said Manafort was evaluating all his options. The jury found Manafort guilty of five counts of filing false tax returns on tens of millions of dollars in Ukrainian political consulting income. He was also convicted of failing to report foreign bank accounts in 2012 and of two bank fraud charges that accused him of lying to obtain millions of dollars in loans after his consulting income dried up. The jury couldn’t reach a verdict on three other foreign bank account charges, and the remaining bank fraud and conspiracy counts. WHAT’S NEXT FOR MANAFORT? The outcome, though not the across-the-board guilty verdicts prosecutors sought, almost certainly guarantees years of prison for Manafort. It also appears to vindicate the ability of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team to secure convictions from a jury of average citizens despite months of partisan attacks, including from Trump, on the investigation’s integrity. The verdict raised immediate questions of whether the president would seek to pardon Manafort, the lone American charged by Mueller to opt for trial instead of cooperating. The president has not revealed his thinking but spoke sympathetically throughout the trial of his onetime aide, at one point suggesting he had been treated worse than gangster Al Capone. The president on Tuesday called the outcome a “disgrace” and said the case “has nothing to do with Russia collusion.” WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THE MUELLER PROBE? The trial did not resolve the central question behind Mueller’s investigation — whether Trump associates coordinated with Russia to influence the election. Still, there were occasional references to Manafort’s work on the campaign, including emails showing him lobbying Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, on behalf of a banker who approved $16 million in loans because he wanted a job in the Trump administration. Manafort urged Kushner to consider the banker, Stephen Calk, for secretary of the Army. Though Kushner responded to Manafort’s email by saying, “On it!” Calk ultimately did not get an administration post. For the most part, jurors heard detailed and sometimes tedious testimony about Manafort’s finances and what prosecutors allege was a yearslong tax-evasion and fraud scheme. Manafort decided not to put on any witnesses or testify himself. His attorneys said he made the decision because he didn’t believe the government had met its burden of proof. His defense team attempted to make the case about the credibility of longtime Manafort protege Rick Gates, attacking the government’s star witness as a liar, embezzler and instigator of any crimes while trying to convince jurors that Manafort didn’t willfully violate the law. Gates spent three days on the stand, telling jurors how he committed crimes alongside Manafort for years. He admitted to doctoring documents, falsifying information and creating fake loans to lower his former boss’ tax bill, and also acknowledged stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars without Manafort’s knowledge by filing fake expense reports. On Wednesday, defense lawyers asked the judge to keep under seal a bench discussion that referenced the special counsel’s pre-trial dealings with Gates. Prosecutors had initially asked the judge not to make the discussion public because of Mueller’s ongoing probe. WHAT WAS THE EVIDENCE? Beyond the testimony, prosecutors used emails and other documents to try to prove that Manafort concealed from the IRS, in offshore accounts, millions of dollars in Ukrainian political consulting feeds. Overall, they said, he avoided paying more than $16 million in taxes. Central to the government’s case were depictions of an opulent lifestyle, including a $15,000 ostrich jacket, luxury suits and elaborate real estate that prosecutors say was funded through offshore wire transfers from shell companies in Cyprus and elsewhere. U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III repeatedly grew impatient with prosecutors as they sought to demonstrate Manafort’s garish tendencies. The clashes between the judge and the prosecutor became a sideshow of sorts during the weekslong trial, with the judge at one point appearing to acknowledge that he had erroneously scolded them. After the trial, Ellis complimented lawyers on both sides for “zealous and effective representation.” He also remarked on his surprise at the level of attention the case has received and the criticism he received for his management of the trial. “We all take brickbats in life,” Ellis said. ANOTHER TRIAL LOOMING? The trial in Alexandria, Virginia, is the first of two for Manafort. He faces a trial later this year in the District of Columbia on charges of conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, making false statements and acting as an unregistered foreign agent for Ukrainian interests. He is also accused of witness tampering in that case. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Prosecutors wrapping up case at Paul Manafort fraud trial
Prosecutors were poised Friday to wrap up their case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, but the sometimes dramatic proceedings hit some unexpected delays after court opened. Judge T.S. Ellis III called a recess without explanation after huddling with attorneys from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office and Manafort’s lawyers for more than 20 minutes. Later after bringing court back into session, he strongly reminded jurors that they weren’t to discuss the tax evasion and bank fraud case with anyone. It was a hiccup as prosecutors headed toward resting their case against Manafort, proceedings that have been sometimes dramatic and featured tense exchanges with Mueller’s prosecutors. Earlier Friday, the prosecutors asked Ellis III to correct an earlier statement in which the judge suggested they were wasting the court’s time. On Thursday, prosecutors questioned a loan officer for Citizen’s Bank of New York, asking about Manafort’s 2016 loan application that the bank rejected. Ellis III interjected: “You might want to spend time on a loan that was granted.” Prosecutors said Ellis’ crack “misrepresents the law” regarding bank conspiracy and “is likely to confuse the jury.” Ellis did not immediately comment on the motion. The developments came after weeks of testimony that was sometimes tedious and based on bank and other records. Some spectators who had waited in line to attend the proceedings were seen falling asleep during a meticulous accounting of transactions, emails and ledgers that form the foundation of the case against Manafort. President Donald Trump’s campaign manager was a longtime political operator in Washington and elsewhere, right up to 2016 when the real estate magnate him as his campaign chairman. The prosecution is Mueller’s first of the investigation into Russian meddling in the presidential election, but neither Manafort nor his former protege Rick Gates has been charged in connection with their Trump campaign work. Though substantive, untelevised and far from a Trump-style reality show, the trial has featured some drama when star witness Gates testified against his former boss. Gates said he helped Manafort commit crimes in an effort to protect Manafort’s finances. Defense attorneys called Gates a liar interested in avoiding jail time under a plea deal. Gates was forced to admit embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from Manafort and an extramarital affair. When the two were first brought face-to-face in the courtroom, Manafort’s gaze bore down on his former protege and rarely wandered. Testimony was replete with examples of Manafort’s lavish lifestyle and allegedly falsified documents, including loan applications. Melinda James, a Citizens Bank mortgage loan assistant, testified that Manafort told the bank that a New York City property would be used as a second residence, but she found it listed as a rental on a real estate website. That distinction matters because banks regard loans for rental, or investment, properties as riskier and may impose restrictions, including on how much money they’re willing to lend. Jurors saw an email from Manafort to his son-in-law, Jeffrey Yohai, in which he advised him that an appraiser was looking to schedule a visit to the property. “Remember, he believes that you and Jessica are living there,” Manafort wrote in the email, referencing his daughter. The prosecution has called more than 20 witnesses, including Gates, and introduced a trove of documentary evidence as they’ve sought to prove Manafort defrauded banks and concealed millions of dollars in offshore bank accounts from the IRS. Along the way, they’ve not only faced an aggressive defense team but tongue-lashings, and a rare walk-back, from Ellis. The judge has subjected the prosecution to repeated scolding over the pace of their questioning, their large amount of trial exhibits and even their facial expressions. But on Thursday, Ellis told jurors he went overboard when he erupted at prosecutors a day earlier for allowing an expert witness to remain in the courtroom during the trial. “Put aside my criticism,” Ellis said, adding, “This robe doesn’t make me anything other than human.” Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
