Manafort lawyers rest without calling witnesses in his trial
His defense feels government hasn’t met burden of proof
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Paul Manafort’s lawyers declined Tuesday to call any witnesses to defend him against charges of bank and tax fraud. Manafort, President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, also told the judge that he did not want to testify, clearing the way for closing arguments and the start of jury deliberations Wednesday.
The decision by the defense to rest without presenting its own evidence was not unusual. “The defense believes it has made its point through crossexamination,” said Nancy Gertner, a Harvard Law School professor and a former federal judge.
Manafort is letting the case go to the jury because he and his attorneys “do not believe that the government has met its burden of proof,” said Kevin Downing, the lead defense lawyer in the case.
Fraud, tax evasion alleged
Earlier Tuesday, Judge T.S. Ellis III of the U.S. District Court in Alexandria also denied a motion by Manafort’s lawyers to acquit him on all 18 charges, another standard defense tactic.
Prosecutors for special counsel Robert Mueller rested their case Monday after calling roughly two dozen witnesses. Manafort, 69, is accused of evading taxes on roughly $16.5 million in income he earned working for pro-Russia political forces in Ukraine. When that income ran out, prosecutors claim, he fraudulently obtained more than $20 million in bank loans so he could maintain an extravagant lifestyle.
Defense lawyers made a special effort, including submitting a last-minute brief, to persuade the judge to throw out four bank fraud charges involving $16 million in loans Manafort obtained from a small Chicago bank in late 2016 and early 2017. Richard Westling, one of Manafort’s lawyers, argued that the bank, Federal Savings Bank, was not defrauded because its chairman, Stephen M. Calk, was determined to do business with Manafort, despite questions about Manafort’s wherewithal. He also argued that bank officials were aware of Manafort’s true financial situation.
Trading on ties to Trump
Emails cited by the prosecution showed Manafort was trading heavily on his connection to the Trump campaign in seeking those loans, one of which he used to prevent another creditor from foreclosing on one of his homes. In August 2016, before he was forced out of his position as campaign chairman, Manafort arranged to add Calk to Trump’s economic advisory committee. In November, just days after the election, Calk sent Manafort a long list of top administration jobs for which he wanted to be considered.
Manafort then emailed Jared Kushner, the president’s son-inlaw, recommending Calk as someone who would “be totally reliable” and would “advance D.T. agenda,” referring to the president-elect. In the next two months, Calk overruled his underlings and granted Manafort more money than any other of the bank’s borrowers had obtained, bank officials testified.
Westling argued that the bank was not victimized because it would have approved Manafort’s loans “regardless of the information” he had submitted.
Defense lawyers have acknowledged that Manafort had no income in 2016 when he was hired by the campaign. Rick Gates, Trump’s former deputy campaign chairman and director of his inaugural committee, testified that it was “possible” that he had embezzled some of the inaugural funds.
The government case turns in part on the credibility of Gates, Manafort’s onetime trusted aide, who has pleaded guilty to two felony charges and is hoping his cooperation will keep him out of prison. Gates testified recounted how he helped Manafort hide income in foreign bank accounts and trick banks into extending him loans he was not qualified to receive.