Paul Manafort, President Trump’s single campaign chairman, is on trial at the federal court in Alexandria on banking and tax fraud. Prosecutors argue that he failed to pay taxes on millions he did from his work for a Russian-Ukrainian political party, then lied to borrow when the cash stopped coming in.
The case is prosecuted by the Special Council which investigated Russian interference in the presidential elections from 2016.
GATES: FOUR AFFAIRS? | $ 60 MILLION FOR 5 YEARS | JUDGE WANTS FOCUS
5:13: IRS Agent: Manafort did not pay taxes of $ 1
5.5 million in Ukrainian income
Prosecutors use IRS agent Michael Welch to clearly state what they argued for in initial statements and have Witnesses witnessed Paul Manafort did not pay taxes on all income earned in Ukraine between 2010 and 2014.
Welch said that Manafort received about $ 15.5 million from Ukraine, which he then paid directly to the suppliers, and which he did not did report or pay taxes on. The money never went into Manafort’s business or personal accounts in the United States, said Welch. Manafort also falsely classified another $ 1.5 million in income as a loan, Welch tested. An FBI auditor explained earlier Wednesday that more than $ 60 million moved through Manafort’s foreign accounts between 2010 and 2014 and spent $ 15 million on home, clothing and other personal purchases.
Asked the obvious question – if the IRS would like to know about the money – Welch gave the obvious answer: Yes, they should.
Welch said that he also looked at the income that was never taken into the United States. He said he was “conservative” in what he was allowed as possible business costs – including 132,000 euros for a sailing company, $ 49,000 for an Italian villa rental, $ 45,000 for cosmetic dental care and $ 19,800 for a riding school – because he heard “No Testimony” explains
Even during the conservative analysis, he said that Manafort did not report millions of dollars in offshore income.
Welch showed that Manafort had $ 16.4 million in unreported income between 2010 and 2014. The IRS agent said the tax declaration Manafort filed during these years was also false because he did not indicate that he had foreign bank accounts.
“They failed to check the box that Mr. Manafort had a foreign bank account,” Welch said, adding, “He should have marked the box,” Yes. “”
During cross-examination, Kevin Downing raised questions about an “advance deduction” that Manafort could have taken or if he might have been able to spread reported income as a way of explaining deviations. Welch testified that there would be opportunities, but at the end of the day, his assessment that Manafort submitted false returns did not change and failed to report income.
And Welch said that he would take a “forgery” deduction. “One must report income to begin qualifying.
16:29: Prosecutor calls a witness who has seen the whole attempt, angry Judge Ellis (UPDATE
Next Up for prosecutors, IRS Revenue Agent Michael Welch, who was awarded in April to help prosecutors prepare for trial. Welch testified that he investigated Paul Manafort’s business and tax records and, as with that
Welch’s appearance on the scene triggered another excited confrontation between Judge TS Ellis III and prosecutor. After reviewing Welch’s qualifications, prosecutors asked if he could be treated as an “expert” witness – which means that, unlike other witnesses, he can get his professional opinion in court. Ellis said he could do it. Assistant US Attorney Uz o Asonye then revealed that Welch had been in courtroom during the proceedings.
Ellis broke out and said that he usually carried all the witnesses – save the matter – from observing the procedure and thought he had done this.
Asonye replied that he believed that experts also had to stay and observe. Ellis said it was not his practice, and while he would allow Welch to testify, he issued a strict warning to Asonye, who prosecutes cases in his district.
“I want you to remember, do not do it again. When I exclude witnesses, I mean everyone,” said Ellis.
UPDATE: Asonye said he thought the transcript would give him back that in this case, Ellis had allowed both the case and the expert to stay. “I do not care what the transcript said, maybe I made a mistake,” pushed Ellis. “Do not do it again.”
The transcript, kindly provided by the beneficial people at CNN, actually shows that Ellis made it possible for the expert to stay in court.
4:25 pm: Is it Manafort’s signature? Or that? Prosecutors, Judges Consider Handwriting on Manafort Documents
Prosecutors tried to terminate their question about FBI auditor Morgan Magionos by reversing the tables of defense lawyers – showing two signatures on the same bank document seized from Paul Manafort’s home as they seemed to believe were different. Defense lawyers had just performed the same exercise, and Magionos acknowledged a signature on the bank document seized in Manafort’s home seemed different from signatures on documents from foreign accounts.
The defense seemed to suggest that Manafort actually did not sign documents bearing its name on accounts in Cyprus, but in some cases the documents were even followed by his passport photo. Defense Attorney Richard Westling asked Magionos about Manafort’s former partner Rick Gates had access to Manafort’s passport, meaning he could be flushed. She said she did not know.
In reply, prosecutor Greg Andres to the jury replied two different pages of a bank document seized from Manafort’s home, showing two signatures from two different dates that appeared to be Manaforts. Andres asked Magionos if she thought they looked different, and she said they did.
Ellis was interrupted.
“I’m sorry they do not look the same? That’s what you’re saying?” He asked incredibly.
She confirmed that she thought the signatures looked different.
“Okay, it’s up to the jury if they look alike,” concluded Ellis.
4: 11:00: FBI Auditor Recognizes Differences in Handwriting by Manafort Bank Documents
In an investigation, one of Paul Manafort’s attorneys Richard Westling tried to undermine the credibility of the documents. FBI auditor Morgan Magionos used to conduct his analysis of Manafort’s foreign banking operations. Westling blinked different documents on the screen that showed signatures that were supposed to be Manafort, but pointed out differences in the writing.
“It looks a bit different”, Magionos told Westling about the differences between two bank documents with a document
In a second example, Westling asked in a second example that a signature on a foreign bank document was compared to a loan application for a loan application California of California. “19659035]” Yes, “replied Magionos.
Under Westling’s questioning, Magionos also testified that she did not know whether Manafort himself wrote the documents she used to track the foreign funds, but added that bank statements and other applications list him as a good actor of the accounts. 19659038] Magionos testified that there were differences between FARA applications and income Manafort reported to bookmakers in both 2012 and 2013, but she found no discrepancies for 2014.
15:42 Manafort raised $ 60 million over five years, including 31 million dollars from Ukrainian politicians 2012
An FBI forensic accountant closed his direct testimony by saying that between 2010 and 2014 fl made over $ 60 million through Paul Manafort’s foreign accounts, and spent $ 15 million on home, clothing and other personal purchases.
2012 seems to have been Manafort’s most lucrative. He paid more than $ 31 million by Ukrainian politicians and held more than $ 27 million, told FBI auditor Morgan Magionos.
It was also the year he spent the most money – more than $ 9.2 million, she testified, mostly on real property.
Prosecutors say that Manafort paid taxes on only about half of its foreign income. He is also charged with Washington, D.C., federal court not to sign up as a foreign agent for his work in Ukraine. He registered in June 2017, but Magionos testified that in these applications he underestimated his foreign income significantly.
In 2012, she declared that the extradition agency for foreign agency registration showed only $ 12 million in receipts and $ 7 million in revenue. But the DAR archiving also gave greater numbers than Manafort told the taxpayer for that year, she said.
Magionos did not testify for her taxable income for 2012, but the prosecution reported it as $ 5.4 million.
2:56: Prosecutors now match offshore transfers to Manafort’s luxury suppliers
Prosecutors continue to methodically track how money flowed from Paul Manafort’s foreign accounts to buy luxury clothes, carpets, landscaping and other goods and services in the United States. With almost every supplier that lawyers heard earlier in the trial, prosecutors have shown a chart showing the company’s bills to Manafort on one side, and the foreign bank transfers apparently seem to pay these bills on the other.
On some charts, the amount invoiced has been significantly less than the amount paid. The bills for Scott L. Wilson landscaping, for example, listed Manafort as $ 218,000, but he seemed to have paid more than 512,000 – $ 503,000 of it via foreign bank accounts. FBI auditor Morgan Magionos said that the deviation was due to the fact that she compiled the chart based only on the invoices that the company had left, even though she did not offer any further explanation.
The purpose of the tables is to connect Manafort to their foreign bank accounts and to show how much money prosecutors say he has not claimed their taxes. Prosecutors further reinforced their case by displaying e-mails where Manafort explicitly directed transfers from the accounts.
The data-heavy testimony has drawn sometimes. Most jury members still take notes and read carefully the computer screens, but some have rubbed their eyes, leaned back and crossed their arms. At one point after prosecutor Greg Andres presented a chart showing how money from two of Manafort’s foreign accounts flowed through several other accounts before it was finally used to buy a home in New York City, Judge T.S. Ellis III was discontinued to clarify that Andrés purpose was to show that Manafort did not report its entire income on its tax returns.
Andres said it was and confirmed that prosecutors did not claim, at least in this trial, that the cash flow through different accounts was otherwise illegal.
“You can get lost with all these movements of money, and sometimes it seems that the government is aiming for,” said Ellis.
14:46: E-mails show Manafort transfer of money from offshore accounts to buy real estate, clothing, cars
FBI forensic accountant Morgan Magionos was charged through various invoices and documents showing that foreign money tied to Paul Manafort was used for purchases by Alan Couture, Big Picture Solutions, Land Rover in Alexandria and other suppliers.
Magionos also testified about strings of e-mails that show Paul Manafort to advise his lawyers to transfer bank transfers from offshore accounts to suppliers. Magionos testified that payments from foreign bank accounts went to buy real estate or other expenses for Manafort, his company, DMP International and his family and close associates.
“Pls make the 5 transfers listed below from the Leviathan account and confirm to me when it’s done,” wrote Manafort in an email to his Cypriot law firm. Soon afterwards $ 32,500 was transferred to Alan Couture, a shop where Manafort bought advanced clothes. In total, more than 748,400 went from Manafort’s foreign bank accounts to Alan Couture between March and November 2010.
Similar money from foreign bank accounts linked to Manafort went to Big Picture Solutions ($ 1,661,201) and Land Rover of Alexandria ($ 163,705). Although some domestic funds were used to cover invoices, a large part of the payments were covered by Manafort’s foreign bank accounts.
2:13: Manafort moved offshore accounts from Cyprus to St Vincent and the Grenadines, says the auditor
FBI forensic accountant Morgan Magionos now tells him that in July 2014, when Manafort was interviewed by the FBI, he had closed all his bank accounts on Cyprus, for which he was listed as an “beneficial owner”. He had instead opened accounts in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, where Russian business associate Konstantin Kilimnik was occupied as owner and employee of his Cypriot lawyer, Cyprus Chrysostomides, received signature authority.
There was a banking crisis in Cyprus, Gates testified earlier, which led Manafort to move his money to St Vincent and the Grenadines.
Magionos continued to testify of a list she created by Cypru’s companies, saying Manafort, Kilimnik or Rick Gates were on incorporation documents. Board members and secretaries for many of these companies, she said, came from a unit called Inter Jura Cy, which was associated with the Cypriot law firm.
While Cyprus at that time felt like an offshore tax haven where the wealthy could silence hide their money, prosecutors said they could get Manafort’s records through a mutual legal treaty with the country.
12:53: Legal Medical Auditor takes a position to track Manafort’s money
Morgan Magionos is the FBI legal auditor who tracked Paul Manafort’s financial affairs as part of the survey and linked foreign bank accounts to domestic expenses.
Magionos, an Authorized Public Accountant and Certified Fraud Officer, reviewed documents and statements from banks in Cyprus, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Britain to analyze Manafort’s foreign financial operations.
Magionos found 31 foreign bank accounts from 2010 to 2014 such as Location Manafort, Rick Gates or Konstantin Kilimnik as the beneficial owners.
Magionos said that she linked the foreign bank accounts to Manafort in part because images of his passport were included in the account opening applications.
These accounts were closed in 2013, Magionos testified.
The court broke at lunch until 1:35, with Ellis again calling on prosecutor Greg Andres to move the question as quickly as possible. Andres appreciated that he had another hour but would do his best.
12:31 p.m.: Judge again with a prosecutor
After a long break, Judge T.S. Ellis III spared again with prosecutors over the trial pace and evidence that they want to acknowledge. Such heated arguments have been common in the trial.
The latest dispute focused on charts that prosecutors want to show jury members who show the flow of money from Paul Manafort’s offshore accounts to specific purchases that he made in the United States. They are going to do what they question the next witness, FBI auditor Morgan Magionos.
Defense lawyers argued that the charts were cumulative, essentially repeated evidence of which other witnesses had already witnessed.
This argument appealed to Ellis, who has repeatedly pushed prosecutors to increase the speed with which they present their case. Ellis noted that the defense did not conflict with Manafort making purchases with foreign accounts and questioning whether an elaborated presentation with an FBI auditor who testifies to the charts was necessary.
As an argument that he should use the maps, prosecutor Greg Andres said that the FBI auditor had done a lot of work to put them together.
“Look, it’s not relevant that she spent her life doing it,” Ellis pointed out and drank laughter from the judges.
“We need to find a way to focus sharply,” continued the referee.
The gear grew slightly more heated.
“We’ve been focusing heavily for a long time,” said Andres. He noted that the government had to attach specific receipts to specific payments and that defense committees had not agreed on any formal provisions on that subject.
Defense Attorney Richard Westling said defense commissioners would provide one of the prosecutor’s maps that offered a high-level summary of Manafort’s purchases and the flow of money. Andres said he was “lost” and noted that the defense had not agreed to do it before Wednesday and that it would be faster to just question the auditor as planned, rather than writing a formal provision.
Ellis agreed to let Andres question Magionos, but he warned that Andres would be short and that Ellis would consider Opposition from the defense on his bench as testimony continued.
“Judges should be patient. They made a mistake when they confirmed me,” Ellis told.
When jury members were brought into court, Ellis noted that he would not let the FBI auditor read some emails from Paul Manafort as prosecutors want lawyers to hear. Andres said he hoped to address the problem later in the afternoon. With jury members entering the courtroom, Ellis thundered that he had read the prosecutor’s letter and seemed to mean that he considered the case to be decided. He said that a previous court decision that they rely on contained just a throwaway line to support their arguments.
Andres was silent when the judges took seat and Magionos was called to the stand.
11:32 am: Gates testimony ends, forensic accountant expected to follow money trace
With Rick Gates from the stand, witnesses now turn from the salacious to the technical. Morgan Magionos, an FBI forensic accountant, is expected to testify in about two hours and talks about tracking payments from Ukraine via Cyprus to Paul Manafort’s fabrics and home improvement contractors in the United States.
Prosecutors and defense lawyers are still discussing whether Magionos may read from Manafort’s own emails regarding the flow of money. These claims are allowed, judge T.S. Ellis said, but he is not sure they can be introduced by this agent.
11:16: The Defense suggests that Gates had four extraterrestrial affairs between 2010 and 2014
Rick Gates went down from the witness spot just before 11:00 AM Wednesday after a fantastic suggestion by one of Paul Manafort’s defense lawyers: Gates may have had four extraterrestrial business.
The proposal came in a final round of investigation by Defense Attorney Kevin Downing. After prosecutors, Gates asked for his precautionary review with lawyers and attorneys, and Gates testified that he had “no doubt at all” that his appeal of appeal should be erased if he was lying on the testimony, Downing examined more in what he referred to a day earlier as Gates “secret life”.
Defense Attorney pointed out about $ 3 million in transactions, from 2010 to 2014, which he has proposed represents Gates embezzled from Manafort. He noted an extramarital business that Gates adopted on Tuesday. Then he asked: Gade Gates reminder of the special council’s office “that you actually engage in four extraterrestrial business?”
Prosecutors contested and asked why that question was relevant. Downing said that it could speak with the idea that Gates was lying in the testimony would lead to his appeal on appeal. The lawyers convened at Judge T.S. Ellis III’s bench for a long conversation that was shrouded in white noise that moved through the courtroom.
When the conference broke up, Downing did not ask the same question. Instead, he pointed to the period 2010-2014 and his earlier questions about Gates’ “secret life”. These questions led Gates to reveal a deal first. Downing asked Gates about his secret life covered this period of time.
“Mr. Downing, I would say I made many mistakes for many years,” said Gates.
Ellis interrupted and told Gates to answer the question.
“It did,” said Gates. 19659106] 10:59: Gates told Manafort of his business, said it lasted for five months
At the end of his question about Gates, Prosecutor Andres asked about the businessport that was revealed during his testimony yesterday. Gates said there was a five month affair that occurred 10 years ago. Gates said that something was discussed with his wife and had said Manafort.
Andres spent much of the quest to build up Gates credibility after the defense’s review. Gates testified that he voluntarily revealed to the FBI that he fell from Manafort. Gates also testified that Manafort said they did not have to disclose the foreign bank accounts or report the money that came to accounts for tax advisors.  Addressing the defense question about Gate’s motivation to testify, Andrew asked again about Gate’s prosecution and prison time he faces. Did Gates think he met up to 200 years in prison because of charges from the federal court in Alexandria, asked Andres? Gates said he thought he would face a minor opinion. Ellis interjected and asked how short gates thought the meaning would be. “I thought it was within 100 years, your honor,” said Gates.
10:33: In rebuttal requests, prosecutors show that Gates hid revenues from offshore accounts 2014 FBI interview
Kevin Downing completed his review of Rick Gates by asking what Paul Manafort’s net worth was about 2015 and 2016.
Was it $ 20 million? Downing asked.
Gates replied that he was not “admired” for Manafort’s personal economy and did not know the value of all his attributes, but “I thought somewhere in the realm of $ 6 [million] to $ 12 million.”
] Prosecutors have said that Manafort reported very different numbers for his net worth. On loan applications over a three-month period in 2016, he represented his net worth as $ 15 million, $ 17 million, $ 21 million and $ 36 million according to court documents.
Special Advisor Greg Andres returned to the lecturer. He started by disproving the idea that Gates and Manafort were honest with the FBI 2014 when agents investigated their former Ukraine client Viktor Yanukovych.
He said he did not tell the agents about any hidden income from those accounts.
] Gates testified that Manafort asked him to go to France and meet one of his Ukrainian consumers, rich politician Serhiy Lyovochkin. Gates said that Manafort wanted to know whether the unit Lyovochkin used to pay them was “clean” – used only for these payments and nothing else.
Andres then proceeded to ask Gates for his trial agreement. Downing said Tuesday that prosecutors had agreed not to oppose their request for a penalty, even though he faces as much as 10 years in prison. But reading the agreement in court, Gates agreed that the commitment was not ironic. The document says that the Special Council may “oppose” such a move, depending on Gate’s cooperation. “
10:25 am: Gates revealed offshore accounts to the FBI 2014, thought he was truthful
Rick Gates testified for a third day just before 10 o’clock and described how he had been interviewed by the FBI as far back as 2014 about his work in Ukraine – and thought he had said the truth.
Under questionnaire from defense prosecutor Kevin Downing, he said he met with FBI agents and lawyers in the Justice Department in July that year. understood the agency, investigated money as Viktor Yanukovych, the political candidate for which he and Paul Manafort had worked could have taken out of Ukraine.
Gates said, above all, that he revealed to the FBI some of the bank accounts of Cyprus and Grenadines that he and Manafort used to receive payments from their Ukrainian benefactors. He said Manafort said they would be “open and provide the information” in response to the Bureau’s questions. Gates testified that he told the FBI that they opened the accounts so that they could easily receive payments from the people they worked for in Ukraine.
The testimony is important because prosecutors have attempted to show that Gates and Manafort hid their connection to the accounts and did not report them on the required forms. That is the reason for some of their fees. Their investigation of the FBI 2014 accounts lowers the idea that they are hiding them. Ports also testified that he and Manafort spoke after his interviews, and Manafort showed that he had been truthful in his own conversation with the agency.
Gates can be on the test only short Wednesday. Downing said he had thought to question him in just 15 minutes and prosecutors said they would have another half-hour or less questions.
9:25 a.m.: Gates was actually not asked to have a deal. He acknowledged it on his own.
On Tuesday, defense prosecutor Kevin Downing appeared to push Rick Gates to acknowledge that he had an extraterrestrial affair as part of the effort to discredit his testimony against Paul Manafort. But a transcript of a bench conference held before the review shows that Downing had not planned to enter into Gates’s infidelity.
“The government raised a question if we were to review Gates on specific or not actions of marital infidelity,” Downing said Judge TS Ellis III. “We are not planning to do that, but we plan to question him what we call him, you know, separate secret life and how … It’s about money he had stolen, veiled and things he did, but specifically as infidelity , we do not think we will get into it. “
Prosecutor Greg Andres had opposed the defense by using business against Gates and said that the Fourth Circuit has argued that “if someone cheats on his wife or anything, it’s not necessarily guiding the truth.”
Downing said that his point was not that Gates was cheating on his wife without “he led a separate secret life from Mr. Manafort and from others “and that he was divorced from his boss to finance that lifestyle. 19659135] But as soon as Downing asked about “secret life of Rick Gates”, the witness was: “It was a time almost 10 years ago when I had a relationship, yes. “
When asked if he took” unauthorized spending “from Manafort to finance the” secret secret life, “Gates replied” yes, I acknowledge that I had a time period where I had a different relationship. “But Gates said most of the money he spent on business came from his legitimate bonuses or from his family and that most money he spent, he shared with his wife.
9:12 am.: Where is Andrew Weissmann?
Until the attempt for Paul Manafort, Andrew Weissmann began to be one of the most prominent members in the prosecutor’s office. He spoke at the federal court in Virginia when Manafort did not accuse bank and tax fraud there and defense lawyers accused him of reading information to I wrote about Manafort before joining the specialist council’s office.
Behind the scenes he was equally important. Manafort business partner Rick Gates told Tuesday that it was Weissmann who confronted him with a lie he had told special advisers, and it was Weissmann who told him that he would have to recognize that lie at an extra cost to keep his action in agreement with the Special Council office living.
But Weissmann has not particularly questioned any witnesses at Manafort’s Virginia trial. He has not even put in the prosecutor’s table. When Weissmann has arrived at the courtroom – and he has not been discovered every day – he has been sitting with the public.
There There is no reason to believe that Weissmann’s absence is for fierce reasons. The Special Council’s office has pushed back the leak’s claim and while an FBI agent proved he was present at a meeting with AP reporters on Manafort, the agent said that AP was offered a little more than a “no comment” and a confirmation that
It is possible that Weissmann is preparing for Manafort’s next trial in DC, which concerns questions similar to Virginia, but participates deeper in Manafort’s work in Ukraine and the US registration requirements associated with it. Weissmann made an application in that case as late as Monday.
A Special Advisor spokesman declined to comment.
9.00: Day 6 Round and Look Forward
Rick Gates is back on the stand for another hour of review Wednesday, because defense attorneys try to paint him so far for compromise to offer credible testimony to his previous boss.
Paul Manafort’s former “right man” assumed Tuesday that he was divorced from his consulting company, engaged in fraud, lied to the special advisor and engaged in an international extraterrestrial business.
He seemed to be sure of points, unwilling to pronounce himself clearly about his crime. But he was consistent saying that he was now telling the truth and that there was a “strong record” to support his key requirements: Manafort directed him to conceal money from the IRS and fake financial documents to get bank loans.
Part of this entry was several emails Manafort sent Gates. The first clarified that Manafort was upset about his 2014 tax fee.
“WTF? How could I blindside of this. You told me you were on top of this,” he wrote Gates in April 2015. “This is a disaster.”
Gates testified that at the Manafort’s direction continued to reclassify a portion of the income as a loan to reduce the tax due.
Another email from February 2016 had Manafort converse with Gates about a loan loss letter that both Gates and an accountant have testified were fraudulent. The loan was actually income disguised to lower Manafort’s taxes, he says, and then forgiven to help Manafort get a loan.
And later that year, when trying to get another loan, Manafort asked Gates for a version of the 2016 Income Statement that could be edited, Gates testified. Manafort then sent to a bank a version of the statement that showed $ 3 million in profit that year rather than $ 600,000 in losses, Gates said in describing emails prosecutors presented in court.
Prosecutors will probably draw Gates back to those facts and away from his own misbehavior on redirect examination.
Here’s The Post’s Rachel Weiner summarizing the highlights of the day. As always, cameras are not allowed in the federal courtroom, so we feature the courtroom sketch work of artist Dana Verkouteren: