White House

New Indictments in Manafort Case

Paul Manafort arrives at a hearing at U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., January 16, 2018. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)
Mueller adds tax and fraud charges.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office announced this afternoon that a federal grand jury in Virginia has returned a superseding indictment against Paul Manafort and Richard Gates. The new indictment, which charges 32 felony counts, replaces the original 12-count indictment filed in late October.

The indictment dramatically alters the case, although not in a way that will surprise National Review readers.

There continues to be no connection to the Trump campaign (which Manafort briefly chaired and Gates also served), much less any suggestion of collusion between the campaign and Russia. The new indictment, however, retreats from the original allegations of money laundering, failure to register as foreign agents, and the so-called conspiracy against the United States.

We observed back in November that all of these charges seemed problematic – the money-laundering theory was shaky, failures to comply with the Foreign Agents Registration Act are rarely charged criminally, and there is no “conspiracy against the United States” in federal law (the charge is either conspiracy to defraud the United States, which seemed to be what Mueller was alleging, or conspiracy to violate a federal criminal law).

We also noted at the time that the oddest thing about the original indictment was the absence of tax-evasion and bank-fraud charges. Mueller had seemed to lay the groundwork for these allegations but to have refrained from charging them.

Voila! The case is now exclusively a tax and bank-fraud case.

Counts 1 through 10 charge Manafort with subscribing false tax returns from 2010 through 2014, and Gates with assisting him in their preparation. Gates is also charged with subscribing to false tax returns in those same years (in Counts 15 through 20 – including two returns for the year 2013). Counts 11 through 14 charge Manafort with failing to file required “FBAR” reports regarding his controlling interest in foreign bank accounts (an offense that appeared in the original indictment); and Counts 21 through 23 charge Gates with that same FBAR offense.

Counts 24 through 32 charge both defendants with bank-fraud conspiracy and substantive bank-fraud offenses in connection with five different loan transactions. The transactions allegedly involve a combined $25.9 million.

As discussed in my aforementioned column, it is likely that Mueller delayed in filing the tax charges because they must be approved by the Justice Department’s Tax Division, which is often a slow process. We predicted that there would be tax charges, in part, because the money-laundering allegations in the original indictment relied on tax offenses. Wisely, I believe, prosecutors discarded the money-laundering counts once the tax charges were ready to go.

One of the main reasons I was surprised by the absence of bank-fraud charges in the original indictment is the heavy penalty for such offenses. As I observed at the time:

Consider this: The penalty for the conspiracy Mueller did charge in Count One [i.e., the now abandoned “conspiracy against the United States”] is no more than five years’ imprisonment (see Section 371 of Title 18, U.S. Code); the penalty for bank-fraud conspiracy is up to 30 years’ imprisonment (see Section 1344). If, as I suspect, Mueller is trying to pressure Manafort [to become a cooperating witness], a bank-fraud conspiracy is a heavier hammer than anything currently in the indictment. Maybe Mueller is planning on a superseding indictment that piles on tax and fraud charges.

That is exactly what the special counsel has done. Suffice it to say that Manafort and Gates are looking at decades in prison if convicted on these charges.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Elizabeth Warren Is Not Honest

If you want to run for office, political consultants will hammer away at one point: Tell stories. People respond to stories. We’ve been a story-telling species since our fur-clad ancestors gathered around campfires. Don’t cite statistics. No one can remember statistics. Make it human. Make it relatable. ... Read More
National Review


Today is my last day at National Review. It's an incredibly bittersweet moment. While I've only worked full-time since May, 2015, I've contributed posts and pieces for over fifteen years. NR was the first national platform to publish my work, and now -- thousands of posts and more than a million words later -- I ... Read More
Economy & Business

Andrew Yang, Snake Oil Salesman

Andrew Yang, the tech entrepreneur and gadfly, has definitely cleared the bar for a successful cause candidate. Not only has he exceeded expectations for his polling and fundraising, not only has he developed a cult following, not only has he got people talking about his signature idea, the universal basic ... Read More

Feminists Have Turned on Pornography

Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, the feminist movement has sought to condemn traditional sexual ethics as repressive, misogynistic, and intolerant. As the 2010s come to a close, it might be fair to say that mainstream culture has reached the logical endpoint of this philosophy. Whereas older Americans ... Read More
White House

The Impeachment Defense That Doesn’t Work

If we’ve learned anything from the last couple of weeks, it’s that the “perfect phone call” defense of Trump and Ukraine doesn’t work. As Andy and I discussed on his podcast this week, the “perfect” defense allows the Democrats to score easy points by establishing that people in the administration ... Read More

Democrats Think They Can Win without You

A  few days ago, Ericka Anderson, an old friend of National Review, popped up in the pages of the New York Times lamenting that “the Democratic presidential field neglects abundant pools of potential Democrat converts, leaving persuadable audiences — like independents and Trump-averse, anti-abortion ... Read More