Prosecutors shift their focus to fraud charges

ALEXANDRIA, VA. » After three days of dramatic and even salacious testimony in the trial of Paul Manafort, prosecutors on Thursday returned to the nuts and bolts of their case against the former Trump campaign chairman as they sought to show he obtained millions of dollars in bank loans under false pretenses.

Attorneys for special counsel Robert Mueller also got a rare — and narrow — acknowledgment from U. S. District Judge T. S. Ellis III that he likely erred when he angrily confronted thema day earlier over whether he had allowed a witness to watch the trial.

The judge’s comments and de- tailed testimony about Manafort’s loans came during the eighth day of his trial as prosecutors began presenting the bulk of their bank fraud case against him after spending days largely on taxevasion allegations. Prosecutors say they expect to rest their case today.

On Thursday, a series of bank employees told jurors about discrepancies and outright falsehoods contained on Manafort’s applications for millions of dollars in loans.

Melinda James, a Citizens Bank mortgage loan assistant, testified that Manafort had 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 be- cause banks regard loans for investment properties as riskier and 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 advises him that an appraiser is 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. “Let me know when you have arranged it.”

Manafort also asserted he did not have a mortgage on a different New York property, even though he actually did, James said.

All the while, Manafort signed paperwork indicating he understood that he could face criminal or civil penalties if he lied to the bank.

Multiple bank officials said accurate information is essential for them as they decide whether to approve a loan.

“The underwriter needs a clear picture of all the debts, the monthly debts, of the borrower in order to make an accurate decision on the loan,” James said.

Airbnb executive Darin Evenson also told jurors that one of Manafort’s New York City properties was offered as a rental through much of 2015 and 2016— a direct contradiction of the documents the longtime political consultant submitted to obtain a $3.4 million loan.

The prosecution has put forward more than 20 witnesses and 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. But along the way they’ve not only faced an aggressive defense team, but a combative relationship with Ellis.

But on Thursday, Ellis told jurors he went overboard when he erupted at prosecutors for allowing an expert witness to remain in the courtroom during the trial.

“Put aside my criticism,” Ellis said, adding, “This robe doesn’t makeme anything other than human.”

The judge’s comments were in response to a written filing by prosecutors arguing that Ellis should instruct the jury that hemade an error in admonishing them during the Wednesday testimony of IRS agent Michael Welch.