Althouse: "The jurors were called back to the courtroom shortly after 1:30 p.m., when they heard Manafort’s attorneys rest their case and say they would not be calling any witnesses."

August 14, 2018

"The jurors were called back to the courtroom shortly after 1:30 p.m., when they heard Manafort’s attorneys rest their case and say they would not be calling any witnesses."

WaPo reports.

56 comments:

Bill, Republic of Texas said...: Why no defense? Prosecutor case too weak or too strong?; 8/14/18, 2:37 PM
CWJ said...: Wow, better be a doozy of a closing argument.; 8/14/18, 2:37 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: I've heard of that as a way of saying "not impressed" to the prosecution.; 8/14/18, 2:40 PM
mccullough said...: Good decision. His lawyers did a good job putting holes in Mueller’s case. Nothing to gain by calling defense witnesses. Manafort likely to be convicted on at least some of the counts but he’s in better shape for a pardon by not taking the stand himself.; 8/14/18, 2:40 PM
Mike Sylwester said...: I wonder if Manafort offered to agree to a plea deal, but Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller would not agree to any deal that did not include impeachment-quality dirt about our President Trump.; 8/14/18, 2:40 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Re the bank loans Manafort got by allegedly misstating his income, assets, etc on the loan applications, is he in default on any of those loans? I have not heard he is or isn't in default nor have I heard any news that the banks are suing him for non-payment?; 8/14/18, 2:44 PM
mccullough said...: Manafort has nothing on Trump. He’s being prosecuted as a message by the swamp to others to cooperate or stay away from Trump in the first place.

Trump sent a message back by firing Yates, Comey, McCabe, and Strzok. Trump will issue pardons. He pardoned Libby as a signal to the others Mueller is prosecuting. This is what HW and Clinton did. Pardons to gut the independent/special counsel selective prosecutions.; 8/14/18, 2:47 PM
mccullough said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/14/18, 2:47 PM
Mike Sylwester said...: One thing is for absolutely sure.

Manafort did not earn millions of dollars by advising Ukrainian politicians how to win elections in Ukraine.; 8/14/18, 2:48 PM
Mr. D said...: Keeps Manafort off the stand
Doesn’t let the prosecution cross-examine any witnesses
Doesn’t let the jury think about prosecution counter-arguments; 8/14/18, 2:50 PM
mccullough said...: The bank fraud on the loan applications is very weak. The head of the bank said he made the loans to curry favor with Manafort angling for an appointment in the Trump administration. Bank loans to connected guys like Manafort aren’t scrutinized. He could have wiped his ass with the application and is getting the loan. Mueller is a connected rich guy who whitewashes reports for the NFL for millions of dollars. He knows this. The judge does too. He’s got a decent shot at an acquittal on these counts.; 8/14/18, 2:52 PM
Henry said...: He'll appeal if necessary. For now he's storing fat.; 8/14/18, 2:53 PM
Mike Sylwester said...: How many members of the jury?

How many of those jury members are required to convict Manafort?; 8/14/18, 2:55 PM
Michael K said...: I don't see a guilty verdict.

Let's see what closing arguments are like. I doubt if we will hear anything honest from the US media. Watch the Telegraph.; 8/14/18, 3:05 PM
Ralph L said...: For now he's storing fat
And preparing a post-acquittal bloom.

I would guess mis-trial. There's bound to be at least one anti-Trump nut on the jury, but fewer than 12.; 8/14/18, 3:06 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Every witness for the prosecution got immunity or stolen cash or both in exchange for playing kangaroos in this court. If I was a juror I'd be curious about all that enrichment of the "witnesses," especially the $400K-$1M that Gates stole from Manafort directly and is not even charged with stealing. And he's the "star" witness!

The other smooth operator was the bank loan officer who, after being granted immunity, told how the bank president wanted a position in the Trump admin (he didn't get it) and urged him to make the hinky loan. Again, if a juror, I'd wonder why the "pressured" bank president wasn't given immunity and why this loan officer did get it? Can't Mueller get testimony without handing out immunity like Halloween candy? I'd be really surprised if he is convicted with such weasily witnesses, but stranger things happen all the time (just watch the ID channel or any Dateline about a trial).; 8/14/18, 3:09 PM
Jim at said...: The defense's response to the prosecution?

Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank you.; 8/14/18, 3:18 PM
Comanche Voter said...: Hmm I wonder if there is a motion for a directed verdict in a federal criminal trial?; 8/14/18, 3:20 PM
Drago said...: Bill, Republic of Texas: "Why no defense? Prosecutor case too weak or too strong?"

If there is a clear paper trail (there probably is) that shows Manafort acting just like every other lobbyist in Washington (there probably is) and if that behavior is technically/actually illegal (it probably is) then Manafort is no doubt guilty.

That no one else in Washington where all the lobbyists are doing this are even being looked at is...interesting...; 8/14/18, 3:25 PM
Mark said...: Hmm I wonder if there is a motion for a directed verdict in a federal criminal trial?

The equivalent of it, yes. And whether in state or federal court, judges routinely deny them -- at least initially -- no matter how weak the evidence on the idea that the weight of the evidence, or lack thereof, is for the jury to decide. That doesn't mean that the defense won't make the motion again later.; 8/14/18, 3:33 PM
traditionalguy said...: Why bother? If they put Manafort on the stand where testifies under oath that he is not guilty, then when he is acquitted Mueller will immediately re-indict Manafort for perjury.

The object of the Federal Extortion racket is to bankrupt an innocent man. It is like crucifying the innocent. That alone says POWER!; 8/14/18, 3:35 PM
Rory said...: Comanche Voter said: "Hmm I wonder if there is a motion for a directed verdict in a federal criminal trial?"

They already did this, when the prosecution rested. The judge said there were facts at issue a jury had to resolve. He can still set aside the verdict if he thinks there's no basis for it.; 8/14/18, 3:51 PM
M Jordan said...: This was a brilliant move! Or it was a terrible blunder. We won't know which until the jury decides. Personally, I think it a high stakes, risk move that "just might work." (Sorry, I don't know how to italicize here.) And even if the jury convicts, I still think it was the right move.; 8/14/18, 3:54 PM
Leland said...: Tradguy, I'll add to it; what witness wants to testify for Manafort, when Mueller's team has been broadcasting its willingness to prosecute on perjury traps? Why subject friends and family to join his persecution?; 8/14/18, 3:55 PM
M Jordan said...: If the jury acquits, Mueller's investigation is over. He can't lose this one or he looks like a boob. A real boob. Comey is a boob, as we all know. So then we'd have two boobs which always looks nice together.; 8/14/18, 3:57 PM
Leland said...: I think this move is just irrelevant in the bigger scheme. Bringing a witness up for the defense will just make them a target of this fishing expedition of an investigation. It is clear the only reason Manafort is on trial is because he had an association with Trump. Anybody that testifies for Manafort will get the same treatment. Either some or all of the jury has figured this out by now, or they're two dumb to figure it out. There is no point in putting anyone else in peril.; 8/14/18, 3:59 PM
Bill, Republic of Texas said...: I guess it really doesn't matter one way or another. If he is convicted of anything Trump will pardon. If he's acquitted or hung jury that would be a devastating bloe against Mueller. The tweets from Trump will be epic!

Doesn't he have another case too?; 8/14/18, 4:02 PM
dreams said...: I think the jury will acquit which is what I'm hoping.; 8/14/18, 4:15 PM
traditionalguy said...: Manafort will not be getting a pardon. Trump sees Manafort as an early cabal plant into his campaign to destroy Trump with the Russian Treason Myth. And that goes double for Roger Stone. Manafort and Stone were in cahoots with the Podesta brothers and wealthy Ukranian/Russians since 2000.; 8/14/18, 4:16 PM
Hagar said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/14/18, 4:24 PM
Hagar said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/14/18, 4:30 PM
Hagar said...: (i) in front of your word(s).
(/i) after your word(s).
But use < and > rather then ( and ).; 8/14/18, 4:32 PM
Ajnal said...: what a crappy little world of victim-hood.

It's just impossible to hold one of your own accountable, isn't it?; 8/14/18, 4:48 PM
tim in vermont said...: It's just impossible to hold one of your own accountable, isn't it?

(cough cough) Bill Clinton...; 8/14/18, 4:58 PM
tim in vermont said...: Nobody is curious why the Russian energy giant and Putin satrapy Gazprom gave Hillary's campaign manager Podesta 75K shares of stock that were worth millions until the value of the company mysteriously collapsed the day after Hillary lost the election. Almost as if the whole rotten scheme was predicated on Hillary being president.

Unfortunately, the choice, and if you read the Wikileaks emails, this was the choice that Hillary schemed for with the press, was Hillary vs Trump.; 8/14/18, 5:02 PM
tim in vermont said...: Hillary thought she was pulling a Harry Reid, who manipulated the Republican primaries in order to assure that he faced the weakest candidate.; 8/14/18, 5:03 PM
tim in vermont said...: Re the bank loans Manafort got by allegedly misstating his income, assets, etc on the loan applications, is he in default on any of those loans?

So Bernie Sanders' wife is next then, because this justice is fair an impartial, amIrite?; 8/14/18, 5:11 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Good point Tim!; 8/14/18, 5:15 PM
readering said...: Saw a legal commenter opine that no defense case means no opportunity to fulfill defense counsel’s promise to show it was all Rick Gates, which they didn’t manage to do during the government’s case.; 8/14/18, 5:31 PM
readering said...: Pardon means has to answer questions about Trump (No more 5th). Same for commuted sentence? Don't think so.; 8/14/18, 5:32 PM
CWJ said...: "It's just impossible to hold one of your own accountable, isn't it?"

Accountable for what? Becoming questionably rich as a lobbyist and influence peddler?

I don't see anyone defending him on that point. Though it seems the prosecution presented little to prove it without buying testimony. What I do see is the political nature of this prosecution which stinks to high heaven. The way you phrased your comment shows that you view this as politics, not justice. If he needs to be convicted then so does half of Washington.; 8/14/18, 5:33 PM
tim in vermont said...: Pardon means has to answer questions about Trump (No more 5th). Same for commuted sentence? Don't think so.

Well, you can always us the Hillary defense, "Well judge, I'm sorry but I just don't remember! Where is my martini?"

I don't know the details of this, but it seems like he is entirely being prosecuted as a warning to anybody who might consider working with Trump.; 8/14/18, 5:59 PM
tim in vermont said...: https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/podesta-manafort-lobbying/index.html

(CNN)One of Washington's most powerful lobbying firms did not disclose the wide extent of its lucrative political work for a Ukrainian group tied to both onetime Trump adviser Paul Manafort and to pro-Russian politicians, new records show.

The firm, the Podesta Group, said nothing in a 2012 lobbying report to Congress about at least 32 meetings, emails and other communications it had with the State Department, at a time when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was scrutinizing Ukraine's upcoming election, records show.

The new disclosures shed light on the web of contacts between Russian-leaning Ukrainians, Washington lobbyists and U.S. policymakers during the Obama administration.

And then you had

The center played both sides of the aisle in US politics, also hiring Manafort's consulting firm and a Republican-leaning lobbying firm, Mercury Public Affairs.
Manafort faces scrutiny from Congress as it investigates whether Trump associates conspired with Russia to tilt the 2016 election toward Trump.

Of course there is no reason to look into the Podesta Group, on account of conspiring to get Clinton elected was not a crime!; 8/14/18, 6:08 PM
tim in vermont said...: Weird that none of this gets any play.

More impartial justice:

The head of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign is linked to a Russian bank involved with an emerging international scandal, according to documents reported on Tuesday.

Related Story: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2587617
Registration forms indicate that the Podesta Group signed up to lobby for the Sberbank of Russia in Washington about a month ago, in early March. The bank has been implicated in a scheme unearthed on Sunday in which leaders worldwide illegally stashed their assets overseas.

The Podesta Group was founded by John Podesta, the chairman of Clinton's 2016 campaign for president and a chief of staff to former president Bill Clinton. His brother, Anthony Podesta, is listed as a lobbyist for the account on the March filing.

Remember when the press made a big stink when Hillary's campaign manager showed up in the Panama Papers? Well, if the press don't make a stink, it didn't happen!; 8/14/18, 6:10 PM
tim in vermont said...: This is why Wikileaks is so fucking evil, they bring shit like this to light, interfering in our elections!

Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s membership on the executive board of an energy company, Joule Unlimited, which received millions from a Putin-connected Russian government fund, also included “75,000 common shares,” according to an email exchange uncovered by the Wikileaks hacks.; 8/14/18, 6:13 PM
Michael K said...: promise to show it was all Rick Gates, which they didn’t manage to do during the government’s case.

Yah think ?

Maybe we should see what the verdict is.; 8/14/18, 6:13 PM
Michael K said...: That no one else in Washington where all the lobbyists are doing this are even being looked at is...interesting...

I wonder if any are on the jury ?

Probably be challenged but my FBI daughter was on a jury. She expected to be challenged and ended up jury foreman.; 8/14/18, 6:15 PM
Michael K said...: Trump sees Manafort as an early cabal plant into his campaign to destroy Trump with the Russian Treason Myth.

Interesting speculation. I don't believe it but Manafort accomplished zero for Trump. The kids hired him.; 8/14/18, 6:17 PM
Bill, Republic of Texas said...: Pardon means has to answer questions about Trump (No more 5th).

None of these charges have anything to do with Trump or the campaign.

So wrong.; 8/14/18, 6:40 PM
tim in vermont said...: One of the more striking outcomes from the DOE Bioeconomy 2017 conference in Washington DC was confirmation of the demise of Joule Unlimited. “We had a lot of prospects last year,” former CEO Brian Baynes told The Digest, “but those new investor prospects walked away, particularly post election.

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2017/07/18/heat-death-joule-unlimited-collapses-as-oil-prices-fall-time-passes-pressure-mounts/

No corruption there! Investors walk away once Hillary loses, Podesta's millions go poof!, well some of his millions.; 8/14/18, 6:42 PM
tim in vermont said...: None of these charges have anything to do with Trump or the campaign.

So wrong.

Go try arguing with motivated thinking. Sometimes I think that all of our trolls are just plants to make us support Trump more by presenting easily refuted arguments.; 8/14/18, 6:44 PM
Rigelsen said...: Why no defense? Prosecutor case too weak or too strong?

It would be ineffective assistance of counsel to rest because the prosecution case is too strong. There are few cases so strong that holes can’t be poked into it. My guess is they think they poked enough holes in the prosecution’s case that additional defense testimony would not be helpful. Or, the only witness that might be helpful would be Manafort himself, but that would expose him to cross and that might at best muddy the waters.

Pardon means has to answer questions about Trump (No more 5th).

If Mueller thought Manafort had any dirt on Trump, he would have given him immunity. I mean, he gave Gates immunity, and he seems to have been guilty of everything Manafort is being prosecuted for and then some.

As far as whether he would be able to take the 5th, note that everything he was prosecuted for happened before his go around with Trump. So, Double Jeopardy does not apply for any testimony related to Trump, since presumably that would not be a continuation of any charge he’s currently fighting. In other words, no, he can still take the 5th.; 8/14/18, 7:01 PM
Hagar said...: According to what I read, the agency in charge of such things "looked at" Manafort and his associates' doings a long time ago and decided there was not enough "there" there for the US Government to bother with, and if Russia or the Ukraine had problems with any of it, let them prosecute.; 8/14/18, 7:22 PM
Bob Loblaw said...: Good decision. His lawyers did a good job putting holes in Mueller’s case. Nothing to gain by calling defense witnesses. Manafort likely to be convicted on at least some of the counts but he’s in better shape for a pardon by not taking the stand himself.

His lawyers can mount a defense without putting him on the stand. Isn't that the way things go, normally?; 8/15/18, 12:56 AM
Bob Loblaw said...: If Mueller thought Manafort had any dirt on Trump, he would have given him immunity. I mean, he gave Gates immunity,

Mueller likes to give immunity. He gave Hillary's IT guy immunity for free.; 8/15/18, 12:57 AM
FIDO said...: Does it strike anyone else as strange that for lying on a bank loan, Manafort is looking at 300 years of sentencing...but someone who murders can get out in 20 for good behavior?; 8/15/18, 3:33 AM