Jury Gets Mind-Boggling Manafort Tax, Fraud Case

A federal jury in Virginia began deliberations on Aug. 16 of charges that President Trump’s 2016 campaign manager committed astonishing levels of multi-million-dollar corruption.

Following a 12-day trial, the jury in the Washington suburb of Alexandria began considering at 9:30 a.m. the tax, bank fraud and conspiracy charges filed by the Justice Department’s special counsel against 2016 Trump Campaign Manager Paul J. Manafort for conduct that stemmed almost entirely from Manafort’s years as adviser to a Russia-friendly Ukrainian political party before he joined the Trump campaign in the spring of 2016.

But one subset set of the 18 pending charges alleged that Manafort — shown in a 2016 screenshot just before the Republican National Convention — received $16 million in unmerited, fraudulent loans from a Chicago banker who sought help from Manafort in 2016 to obtain a top post in the Trump administration.

That evidence opened a rare window into a breathtaking degree of corruption involving Trump supporters like Manafort and Chicago banker Stephen Calk, even if Calk obtained only an advisory post instead one of more than a dozen other top posts that he wanted.

Quoted below is Calk’s seemingly illegal letter of self-recommendation (with repeated misspellings of simple words) and grandiose expectations of becoming Army Secretary, Treasury Secretary, or some comparable post near the highest level of government.

Trump’s influential son-in-law Jared Kushner’s email introduced at the trial quoted Kushner as telling Manafort that he, Kushner, was “on” the task of reviewing Manafort’s recommendation of Calk. Manafort had been replaced as campaign manager during the summer but was still attempting to wheel and deal.

The first trial by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team is important in sustaining public confidence for the probe because Trump and his supporters are ramping up their relentless effort to kill the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and related issues.

The stakes are thus far beyond Manafort’s fate.

Mention of circumstances surrounding the $16 million in loans was an exception to the general rule imposed by the presiding judge that Manafort’s campaign and Trump connections would be kept to a minimum during the trial even though those relationships are what kept the 100-seat courtroom packed to capacity throughout the trial. An overflow room was also near capacity at many times, including during closing arguments Wednesday.

The prosecution presented a powerful case with 27 witnesses supported by nearly 400 exhibits to show that Manafort paid minimal taxes on $60 million in income hidden in European banks from 2010 to 2014. The banks were in Cyprus, a preferred locale for Eastern European money launderers. Not mentioned during the trial but well known to investigators is that Trump’s Mar-a-Lago crony and current U.S. Treasury Secretary Wilbur Ross formerly served as chairman of the Bank of Cyprus.

The government also charged Manafort with repeatedly submitting false documents later during the years 2015 and 2016 to obtain millions of dollars more in phony loans from three banks after his major income from oligarchs dried up with the 2014 overthrow of his main client, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, and Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska.

The defense presented no witnesses and argued during closing arguments that any wrongdoing was committed by Manafort’s junior partner Rick Gates, left, who is now a prosecution witness, and other largely unnamed players. Gates seeks leniency with a guilty plea but is required to testify honestly or face renewed prosecution.

The defense argument seemed so weak — according to many courtroom observers, including this editor — that it seemed likely that Manafort was avoiding a plea deal and relying on some non-courtroom strategy, such as a possible Trump pardon.

The prosecution, which gets the last word because it carries the burden of proof, responded via Greg Andres. “The star witness in this case,” he said, “is the documents,” not Gates.

This editor attended selected segments of the trial. Provided below are excerpts from others’ coverage.