DC Judge Dismisses 'Plea for Leniency' While Imposing Manafort Sentence
The former Trump campaign chairman will spend 7.5 years in prison between his two sentences.
March 13, 2019 at 12:20 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge in Washington sentenced former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort to about six years in prison Wednesday on charges connected to his past lobbying work for Ukraine, rejecting his claims of remorse as an uninspiring “plea for leniency.”
The sentence, which elevated Manafort's total prison term to about seven-and-a-half years, came less than a week after he was sentenced in Alexandria, Virginia, on financial fraud charges.
In the Alexandria proceeding, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis of the Eastern District of Virginia made note of the fact that Manafort had not given a clear apology in his final words in court. “I certainly recommend you do it in the District of Columbia,” Ellis told him.
Manafort, who was also indicted by the Manhattan district attorney Wednesday for mortgage fraud, appeared to take that advice in Washington. As his voice filled Jackson's courtroom, it didn't take long for him to utter the word Ellis wanted to hear last week.
“I want to say to you now: I am sorry for what I have done,” Manafort said from his wheelchair. “Let me be very clear, I accept responsibility for the acts that have caused me to be here today.”
Still, Jackson questioned whether Manafort had “really accepted responsibility” for contacting witnesses in an attempt to tamper with their testimony. And she said that while Manafort's crimes did not make him “public enemy No. 1,” he was not a victim either.
Instead, Jackson described a throughline of dishonesty and “dissembling” by Manafort over the course of his legal saga, including allegations he attempted to tamper with witnesses while on bail and false statements he gave in apparent breach of his September plea agreement.
“Court is one of those places where facts still matter,” Jackson said. “Saying, 'I'm sorry I got caught,' is not an inspiring plea for leniency.”
Manafort pleaded guilty in Washington to a pair of conspiracy charges last year after a jury in Alexandria found him guilty of bank and tax fraud. In Washington, he was accused of failing to disclose his past lobbying work for Ukraine as required under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and skirting taxes on that lucrative line of business.
Jackson on Wednesday criticized Manafort for hiding his wealth to sustain an opulent lifestyle, saying he had more homes than anyone could enjoy and more suits than any one man could wear. A lead prosecutor for the special counsel's office, Andrew Weissmann, had painted Manafort as a brazen criminal who broke the law to “fuel an extravagant lifestyle.”
The judge also addressed what wasn't alleged in the case: collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 presidential election. Evidence of collusion, she said, was “not presented in this case—period.”
Outside court, Manafort's lead defense lawyer, Kevin Downing, said, “Judge Jackson conceded that there was absolutely no evidence of Russian collusion in this case.”
In court, Downing said the special counsel's involvement in Manafort's case resulted in disparate treatment. He said the Justice Department has brought only about a half dozen cases over FARA violations since the mid-1960s, saying the government's priority through the years had been to bring “more folks in and get filed, not bring criminal prosecutions.”
Jackson on Wednesday dismissed the notion that Manafort's failure to register under FARA was merely a violation of a “pesky regulation.”
In choosing not to register his lobbying work for Ukraine, she said, Manafort was “hiding the truth of who he represented,” effectively lying to members of Congress and the American public.
“When people don't have the facts, democracy can't work,” she said.
Weissmann said secrecy underpinned Manafort's lobbying work for Ukraine, allowing him to enlist foreign leaders to advocate for the country and appear independent when they were, in fact, “handsomely paid.”
“Secrecy was integral to what Mr. Manafort wanted to do for Ukraine,” Weissmann said.
Sitting behind Weissmann was a former Mueller prosecutor, Brandon Van Grack, who was recently appointed to lead the Justice Department unit devoted to enforcing FARA.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
Auditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute readTrump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250