Defense lawyers for Paul Manafort rested in the federal case against the former Trump campaign chairman late Tuesday morning.
Lawyer Kevin Downing said in federal court that the defense would not present a case nor call any witnesses in the defense of Manafort in what is the 11th day of Manafort’s trial for bank and tax fraud in Alexandria, Va.
Before Manafort’s lawyers announced they would rest their case, the federal courtroom was sealed off from the public for nearly two hours before reopening around 11:30 a.m, but the reason was not disclosed.
Manafort appeared roughly 10 minutes later, looking solemn in an all-black suit.
After Downing instructed the court that the defense had rested its case, Manafort appeared at the podium before U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III, who reiterated to him that he had the right to remain silent.
Manafort indicated to the court he had discussed the decision not to take the stand with his attorneys.
When Ellis asked whether Manafort wished to testify, Manafort replied “No, sir.”
He then returned to his seat.
The jury is expected to return to the courtroom this afternoon, where Manafort’s lawyers will formally announce the decision to rest their case in front of jurors.
Lawyers for both sides will then meet for a conference about jury instructions. Closing arguments are set to begin Wednesday morning.
Attorneys for Mueller’s team and the defense estimated their closing arguments would take two hours apiece, but Ellis implored them Tuesday to lessen the time.
The judge told the court that two hours per side “seems a bit excessive” and urged them to “tamp it down a bit.”
Ellis also threw out a motion by the defense to acquit Manafort of all charges, which Manafort’s defense team filed late Monday.
Both sides argued briefly about the motion, which focused specifically on four counts related to loans Manafort received from the Federal Savings Bank, which totaled $16 million.
“Federal Savings Bank was aware of the status of Paul Manafort’s finances,” defense attorney Richard Westling argued. “They came to the loans with an intent of doing business with Mr. Manafort.”
Westling told Ellis the evidence presented by the government hadn’t demonstrated the statements Manafort made to the bank—which prosecutors said including falsehoods—were “material to its decision to lend.”
Federal Savings Bank, he continued, restructured the loans in a manner that accounted for any issues that may have arisen during the course of the loan application process.
But prosecutor Uzo Asonye said that even if Stephen Calk, chairman and CEO of the bank, decided to overlook Manafort’s financial woes, submitting fraudulent documents to a bank is still a federal crime.
“Steve Calk is not the bank,” Asonye said, noting that Calk had a “different motive” to give the loans.
Dennis Raico, an employee of Federal Savings Bank, testified last week that he was told Calk helped Manafort obtain the $16 million in loans because he hoped for a Cabinet-level position in the Trump administration.
“I’m not really sure there’s evidence he knew the documents were false,” Asonye added.
Ellis took little time to side with Mueller’s team.
“The defense makes a significant argument about materiality but […] I think materiality is an issue for the jury,” he said. “That is true for all of the other counts. Those are all jury issues.”
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team rested their case against Manafort on Monday, capping 10 days of evidence and testimony as they worked to convince a jury that Manafort concealed millions of dollars in offshore bank accounts and misled banks to secure loans.
The jury of 12 — six men and six women — heard from 27 witnesses over the span of more than two weeks. Four alternates also heard the evidence presented by prosecutors.
The trial involving Manafort is the first to stem from Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which the special counsel took over in May 2017. So far, there has been no mention of Russia, and only sparse reference to President Trump.
Manafort faces 18 counts of tax and bank fraud, and if the jury finds him guilty and sends him to prison for what could be the rest of his life, Mueller’s investigation could gain new steam ahead of the midterm elections.
But if Manafort is acquitted, it would likely bolster calls from Trump and his supporters for the special counsel’s investigation to be shut down and amplify claims the inquiry is a “witch hunt.”
During the first week of proceedings, prosecutors sought to pull the jury into Manafort’s life of luxury, which they say he was able to enjoy after making $60 million from Ukrainian oligarchs who supported Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and the Party of Regions.
But much of that money was concealed in offshore bank accounts tied to more than a dozen shell companies Manafort controlled in Cyprus and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and never reported to the Internal Revenue Service.
Once the spigot of funds from Manafort’s Ukraine work ran dry, prosecutors then say he resorted to defrauding banks to secure millions of dollars in loans in an effort to maintain his high-end lifestyle.
The government has presented evidence to the jury showing Manafort, with the help of his former business associate Rick Gates, fudged financial statements for his firm, Davis Manafort Partners International, to inflate its income.
Manafort and Gates also classified $1.5 million of income as a loan to lessen Manafort’s tax bill, then said the “loan” had been forgiven to make Manafort appear more attractive to banks, Gates told the court.
Gates testified in the case across three days. He was indicted alongside Manafort, but pleaded guilty.
Manafort is slated to face a second trial in Washington in September on separate charges of money laundering and failure to register as a foreign agent. He has pled not guilty to all of the charges.
