Judge Amy Berman Jackson on Wednesday blasted what she called the “no collusion mantra” she heard from Paul Manafort’s attorneys during his trial, and called it a distraction just before she sentenced him to 43 additional months in prison.
Jackson indicated during the sentencing hearing that Manafort’s lawyers may have been stressing that none of his crimes showed that President Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election in a bid to win a pardon from Trump. But, she said their “no collusion refrain is irrelevant to the matter at hand.”
“The repetition of this claim, which has no bearing on the matter before us, suggested it wasn’t being repeated for the person you were trying to persuade in court, but for some other audience,” she said, in a hint that she suspects the lawyers were putting on a show for Trump.
The conspiracy and obstruction of justice charges against Manafort stemmed from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Trump’s relationship with Russia. But Jackson said the ultimate question of collusion would be settled by Mueller, not her court.
“Therefore, it was not resolved. And I don’t believe it can be considered resolved yet, because the special counsel’s investigation is not over,” she said.
Jackson rejected another assertion from one of his attorneys that Manafort wouldn’t be on trial at all but for his role as Trump’s campaign chairman, a sign that Manafort is the victim of a political attack.
“If not for a short stint in the 2016 presidential election, I don’t think we’d be here right now, and I’d like the court to consider that,” one his lawyers said.
“When the defense says that Mr. Manafort would not be here if not for the special counsel, I’m not sure what evidence that is based on,” Jackson responded. “Before anyone had considered a special counsel, the Justice Department was looking into this matter. And Mr. Manafort lied to the Justice Department in November 2016, after the presidential election but before the special counsel was even appointed.”
“The defense’s core argument is that but for the appointment of a special counsel, he would not have been charged in these crimes. But that argument falls flat,” Jackson added.
Jackson said there was nothing improper with the special counsel’s office investigating and prosecuting Manafort’s crimes, even if they weren’t related to Russian collusion. “It is not uncommon for investigators to discover Crime X while investigating Crime Y,” she said.
She added that the constant emphasis on the lack of Russian collusion might also be a sign that he isn’t sorry for his actions.
“Manafort’s insistence that none of this should be happening, even after courts in Virginia and D.C. found that the special counsel was legitimate, is just one more thing that conflicts with the acceptance of responsibility,” she said.
At one point, Jackson interrupted when it seemed like Manafort’s attorneys might have been accusing Mueller of having political motivations. Jackson quickly asked, “Whose political motivations?”
The defense attorney replied, “Everybody out there. The media.” When Jackson asked if he was talking about Mueller directly, the defense attorney said, “No. I’m not accusing the special counsel.”
Manafort’s lawyers had more luck in the Virginia case in front of Judge T.S. Ellis III, who stressed during the sentencing hearing that Manafort’s crimes had nothing to do with collusion with Russia.
Trump would follow up with a tweet of his own the next day: “Both the Judge and the lawyer in the Paul Manafort case stated loudly and for the world to hear that there was NO COLLUSION with Russia. But the Witch Hunt Hoax continues…”
But, as Judge Jackson said in court today: “The ‘no collusion’ mantra is a non-sequitur. And it’s unknown if it’s even accurate, because the special counsel’s work is still unfinished.”
