WELL DONE. >> THANK YOU.
>>> AND THANKS TO YOU AT HOME
FOR JOINING US THIS HOUR.
LOTS OF NEWS TO GET TO TODAY.
YOU KNEW THIS NEWS WEEK WAS
GOING TO BE CRAZY.
WE SORT OF KNEW THAT FRIDAY WAS
GOING TO BE CRAZY.
WE DIDN’T KNOW IT WAS GOING TO
BE THIS CRAZY.
AND THIS IS HISTORIC.
TODAY IS THE DAY IN AMERICAN
HISTORY THAT THE SITTING
PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN
WAS REMANDED INTO FEDERAL
CUSTODY.
CUSTODY. PUT IN JAIL.
AND WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW THAT
WENT BECAUSE WE JUST GOT THE
TRANSCRIPT.
TRANSCRIPT. SO LET ME TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENED
HERE.
HERE. THERE WERE THREE PROSECUTORS
FROM THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S
OFFICE, ALSO AN FBI AGENT
WORKING WITH MUELLER’S TEAM.
ON THE OTHER SIDE THERE WERE
THREE DEFENSE LAWYERS WORKING
FOR THE PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN
CHAIR, PAUL MANAFORT, AND PAUL
MANAFORT HIMSELF, AND PAUL
MANAFORT HIMSELF WHO’S IN THE
COURTROOM TOO.
COURTROOM TOO. WE START WITH AN ARRAIGNMENT.
PAUL MANAFORT YOU REMEMBER WAS
CHARGED JUST A FEW DAYS AGO WITH
NEW FELONY CHARGES.
AN ARRAIGNMENT IS WHERE YOU
STAND UP IN COURT AND FACE THE
CHARGES AGAINST YOU AND SAY
WHETHER YOU ARE PLEADING GUILTY
OR NOT GUILTY.
THAT’S WHAT THEY DID FIRST, THE
ARRAIGNMENT.
ARRAIGNMENT. COURTROOM DEPUTY, "ARE YOU PAUL
J. MANAFORT JR."?
DEFENDANT PAUL MANAFORT, "I AM."
COURTROOM DEPUTY, "ARE YOU THE
PERSON NAMED IN THE SUPERSEDING
INDICTMENT?"
INDICTMENT?" DEFENDANT PAUL MANAFORT, "I AM."
COURTROOM DEPUTY, "YOU ARE
CHARGED IN CRIMINAL CASE
17-201-1 IN A SEVEN-COUNT
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT CHARGING
YOU WITH THE FOLLOWING.
COUNT NUMBER 1, CONSPIRACY
AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.
COUNT NUMBER 2, CONSPIRACY TO
LAUNDER MONEY.
LAUNDER MONEY. COUNT NUMBER 3, ACTING AS AN
UNREGISTERED AFTH A FOREIGN
PRINCIPAL.
PRINCIPAL. COUNTRY NUMBER 4:00 FALSE AND
MISLEADING STATEMENTS CONCERNING
THE FOREIGN AGENTS REGISTRATION
ACT.
ACT. COUNT NUMBER 5, FALSE
STATEMENTS.
STATEMENTS. COUNT NUMBER 6, OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE.
JUSTICE. AND COUNT NUMBER 7, CONSPIRACY
TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE."
COURTROOM DEPUTY CONTINUES, "DO
YOU WAIVE FORMAL READING OF THE
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT?
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT? DEFENDANT PAUL MANAFORT SAYS "I
DO."
DO." PAUL MANAFORT’S ATTORNEY KEVIN
DOWNING SAYS "WE DO."
AND THEN THE JUDGE SAYS, "FOR
THE PURPOSES OF THE ARRAIGNMENT
HOW DO YOU PLEAD TO THE
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT?"
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT?" DEFENDANT PAUL MANAFORT SAYS,
"NOT GUILTY."
"NOT GUILTY." TO WHICH THE JUDGE SAYS, "ALL
RIGHT."
RIGHT." SO THAT’S THE START.
THE SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT HE
JUST PLED NOT GUILTY TO, THAT’S
THE NEW INDICTMENT WHERE THE
PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN IS
CHARGED IN PART IN A JOINT
INDICTMENT WITH A RUSSIAN GUY.
A RUSSIAN CITIZEN WHO THE
SPECIAL COUNSEL SAID TODAY IN
COURT IS IN RUSSIA NOW AND WHO
THE SPECIAL COUNSEL HAS SAID
PREVIOUSLY IS BELIEVED TO BE
ACTIVELY LINKED TO A RUSSIAN
INTELLIGENCE AGENCY.
INTELLIGENCE AGENCY. SO PAUL MANAFORT IN THIS
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT, THE LAST
TWO COUNTS OF THIS INDICTMENT,
HE’S CHARGED JOINTLY WITH A
RUSSIAN GUY LINKED TO RUSSIAN
INTELLIGENCE.
INTELLIGENCE. NOW, THE RUSSIAN INTEL GUY
MANAFORT IS CHARGED WITH IN THE
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT, THE
RUSSIAN GUY DID NOT TURN UP IN
COURT FOR HIS ARRAIGNMENT ON
THESE CHARGES TODAY ALONG WITH
PAUL MANAFORT, BUT WE’LL HAVE
MORE ON THAT IN A MOMENT.
NOW, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT WAS MORE
DRAMATIC.
DRAMATIC. FIRST WE GOT HIM PLEADING NOT
GUILTY TO THE NEW CHARGES THAT
HE’S FACING ALONG WITH HIS
RUSSIAN CO-DEFENDANT, WHO’S NOT
THERE IN COURT.
AND THEN WE GET THE PART THAT
LEADS TO HIM GOING TO JAIL.
YOU’LL RECALL THAT PAUL MANAFORT
WAS FIRST CHARGED LAST OCTOBER,
THEN HE WAS FURTHER CHARGED IN
FEBRUARY, THEN HE WAS FURTHER
CHARGED LAST WEEK.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED TODAY AFTER HE
WAS ARRAIGNED ON THE NEWEST SET
OF CHARGES TODAY, THE ONES WHERE
HE PLED NOT GUILTY, WHAT
HAPPENED RIGHT AFTER THAT WAS
THAT THEN THE JUDGE TOOK UP THE
ISSUE AT LENGTH OF WHETHER OR
NOT MANAFORT COULD CONTINUE TO
BE OUT ON HOUSE ARREST WHILE
HE’S WAITING FOR HIS TRIAL TO
START.
START. THE LATEST CHARGES FROM THE
SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE SAY
THAT MANAFORT SECRETLY CONTACTED
WITNESSES IN HIS CASE AND TRIED
TO GET THOSE WITNESSES TO LIE
FOR HIS BENEFIT AND HE MADE
THOSE CONTACTS WHILE HE’S OUT ON
BAIL ON THESE OTHER CHARGES.
THAT’S WITNESS TAMPERING,
ACCORDING TO PROSECUTORS.
THEY BROUGHT THESE CHARGES
AGAINST PAUL MANAFORT, LETTING
THE JUDGE KNOW THAT IN THEIR
ESTIMATION HE’S BEEN TAMPERING
WITH WITNESSES AND THEREFORE
THEY SHOULD RECONSIDER -- THE
JUDGE SHOULD RECONSIDER THE FACT
HE’S OUT ON BAIL.
THE JUDGE THEN HAD TO DECIDE,
GIVEN THESE NEW SERIOUS WITNESS
TAMPERING CHARGES, IF PAUL
MANAFORT COULD STILL STAY OUT ON
BAIL OR WHETHER SHE NEEDED TO
REVOKE HIS BAIL AND INSTEAD PUT
HIM IN JAIL.
FOR THE TIME BETWEEN NOW AND
WHEN HIS TRIAL STARTS.
AND AS YOU KNOW, THE JUDGE
ULTIMATELY DID DECIDE THAT SHE
NEEDED TO PUT PAUL MANAFORT IN
JAIL.
JAIL. AND THAT JAILING MEANS OF COURSE
THERE’S AN AMAZING AMOUNT OF NEW
PRESSURE ON THE PRESIDENT’S
CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN, WHO TONIGHT
AS I SPEAK SITS IN JAIL FOR THE
FIRST NIGHT.
FIRST NIGHT. BUT BECAUSE WE GOT THIS
TRANSCRIPT WE ALSO HAVE A UNIQUE
WINDOW INTO WHAT THE PRESSURE IS
LIKE ON HIM ALREADY, WHAT THE
PRESSURE HAS BEEN LIKE ON HIM IN
THE COURTROOM.
THE COURTROOM. I DON’T KNOW IF THERE’S ANY
OTHER WAY TO GET -- IF YOU
COULDN’T BE IN THE COURTROOM,
SINCE THERE’S NO CAMERAS IN THE
COURTROOM, I DON’T KNOW IF
THERE’S ANY OTHER WAY TO GET A
SENSE OF WHAT HAPPENED HERE
OTHER THAN BY GETTING IT FROM
THIS TRANSCRIPT.
THIS TRANSCRIPT. BUT CHECK THIS OUT.
WHAT’S HAPPENING HERE IS
MANAFORT’S DEFENSE TEAM IS
TRYING TO ARGUE THAT WHEN PAUL
MANAFORT IN FACT ADMITTEDLY
CALLED AND TEXTED THESE PEOPLE
ABOUT HIS CASE HE COULDN’T HAVE
BEEN TAMPERING WITH WITNESSES.
THEY BASICALLY TRIED TO CONTEND
TODAY THAT HE WAS JUST REACHING
OUT TO PEOPLE HE KNEW.
THESE PEOPLE HE WAS REACHING OUT
TO TO TALK ABOUT HIS CASE, HE
DIDN’T KNOW THEY WERE WITNESSES
IN HIS CASE.
SO HERE’S WHERE MANAFORT’S
DEFENSE LAWYERS MAKE THAT CASE
TO THE JUDGE.
AND THE JUDGE CONSIDERS IT, AND
THEN SHE GIVES THE PROSECUTOR
FROM ROBERT MUELLER’S OFFICE A
CHANCE TO RESPOND.
AND THE MUELLER’S OFFICE
PROSECUTOR JUST DESTROYS THE
CASE THEY WERE MAKING.
HERE WE GO.
RICHARD WESTLING, WHO’S ONE OF
MANAFORT’S DEFENSE LAWYERS.
HE SAYS, "I THINK THE DIFFICULTY
HERE, YOUR HONOR, IS THAT THIS
IS A XWROD-BROAD-RANGING MATTER
IS LARGELY SOMETHING THE
GOVERNMENT CONTINUES TO EXPAND,
AND WITH THAT IT PUTS MR.
MANAFORT IN THE POSITION OF NOT
KNOWING WHETHER ANY CALL HE
MAKES IS A RISK OF VIOLATING THE
UNKNOWN LIST OF WITNESSES IN A
SITUATION WHERE THAT’S NOT MADE
CLEAR.
CLEAR. AND SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, A
CLEAR NO-CONTACT RULE WILL SOLVE
THE PROBLEM.
THE PROBLEM. I THINK IF WE SIMPLY CUT OFF
THAT LINE OF CONTACT IT WILL
SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
WE’RE TRYING IN AN APPROPRIATE
WAY FOR THE COURT TO WEIGH THE
BALANCE IT IS FORCED TO WEIGH,
WHERE THERE’S A GENERAL SENSE
THAT WHERE THERE ARE CONDITIONS
REMAINING OUT OF SKRAL PENDING A
TRIAL IS THE PROPER RESULT.
AND I KNOW THAT THESE ARE THE
KINDS OF THINGS JUDGES WISH THEY
DIDN’T HAVE TO DEAL WITH."
AND THE JUDGE SAYS, "I -- YES."
AND THE DEFENSE LAWYER SAYS, "WE
ALL GET THAT."
AND THEN THE JUDGE SAYS, "THIS
HAS BEEN, IT CONTINUES TO BE TO
THIS MINUTE, AN EXTRAORDINARILY
DIFFICULT DECISION."
DIFFICULT DECISION." AND MANAFORT’S DEFENSE LAWYER
SAYS, CUT I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT I BELIEVE THAT MR. MANAFORT
CAN BE PUT IN A POSITION, YOU
WHY HONOR, WHERE CONDITIONS CAN
BE SET," MEANING CONDITIONS OF
HIS RELEASE.
HIS RELEASE. CONDITIONS OF HIS BAIL.
"I THINK THAT MANAFORT CAN BE
PUT IN A POSITION, YOUR HONOR,
WHERE CONDITIONS CAN BE SET, AND
I THINK THAT’S LARGELY A
NO-CONTACT RULE THAT’S CLEAR AND
UNAMBIGUOUS FROM THIS COURT.
THEN THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.
AND THE GOAL OF WHAT THE COURT
DOES HERE TODAY IS ALL ABOUT
PREVENTING IT FROM HAPPENING
AGAIN.
AGAIN. IF WE JUMP TO THE THOUGHT THAT
THAT MEANS HE SHOULD BE
REMANDED," MEANING JAILED,"
TODAY, THAT MAY ACHIEVE THE
RESULT BUT IT WILL DO SO IN A
MANNER THAT IS MORE HARSH AND
CREATES MORE CHALLENGES FOR THIS
DEFENDANT AS HE FACES TWO TRIALS
IN SEPARATE COURTS AND PREPARING
FOR THOSE TRIALS.
IT WOULD BE MORE HARSH AND
CREATE MORE CHALLENGES FOR THIS
DEFENDANT THAN THE BAIL REFORM
ACT REQUIRES OR COMPELS UNDER
THESE CIRCUMSTANCES."
THESE CIRCUMSTANCES." TO WHICH THE JUDGE SAYS, "ALL
RIGHT.
RIGHT. THANK YOU."
THANK YOU." THEN SHE TURNS TO THE
PROSECUTION, TURNS TO THE
SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE, AND
SAYS, "YOU HAVE THE BURDEN, MR.
ANDRES, SO I’LL LET YOU, SINCE
YOU’RE ALREADY STANDING."
THE PROSECUTION FROM THE SPECIAL
COUNSEL’S OFFICE IS ALREADY
STANDING AT THIS POINT.
IT’S GREG ANDRES, WHO’S THE
PROSECUTOR.
PROSECUTOR. AND HE JUMPS IN AND HE SAYS
THIS.
THIS. "MY COLLEAGUE," MEANING DEFENSE
COUNSEL WHO I’M ARGUING AGAINST
HERE, "MY COLLEAGUE HAS THE LAW
ABSOLUTELY WRONG WITH RESPECT TO
WITNESS TAMPERING.
WITNESS TAMPERING. ABSOLUTELY WRONG.
ABSOLUTELY WRONG. A DEFENDANT CAN BE INVOLVED IN
WITNESS TAMPERING WITHOUT A LIST
OF GOVERNMENT WITNESSES, RIGHT?
IT’S ANY PERSON WHO MAY GIVE
TESTIMONY.
TESTIMONY. WITH THE HAPPSBURG GROUP WHICH
IS THE PERSON MR. MANAFORT IS
REACHING OUT TO PERSONS D-1 AND
D-2 ABOUT, PERSONS D-1 AND D-2
THEY CONTROLLED THE HAPSBURG
GROUP.
GROUP. IT’S INCONCEIVABLE HE DOESN’T
KNOW THEY’RE POTENTIAL
WITNESSES.
WITNESSES. AND THAT’S WHAT THE LAW IS.
NOT THAT THEY’VE BEEN TOLLS THAT
IT’S THE WITNESS.
IT ISN’T ABOUT A NO CONTACT
LIST.
LIST. THIS IS ABOUT INFLUENCING THE
TESTIMONY OF A POTENTIAL
WITNESS, A CRIME FOR WHICH MR.
MANAFORT HAS NOW BEEN INDICTED.
HE HAS ABSOLUTELY VIOLATED THE
TERMS OF HIS BAIL BY COMMITTING
A CRIME WHILE ON BAIL.
THAT’S ONE.
THAT’S ONE. TWO, HE HAS THE LAW ABSOLUTELY
WRONG ABOUT THREATS OF VIOLENCE
AND WITNESS TAMPERING.
WHEN A WITNESS, WHEN A DEFENDANT
TELLS A WITNESS A FALSE STORY
AND REMINDS HIM OF THAT STORY,
THE COURTS HAVE HELD REPEATEDLY
THAT THAT CONSTITUTES WITNESS
TAMPERING.
TAMPERING. SO MR. WESTLING, THE DEFENSE
COUNSEL, IS WRONG ABOUT WHAT IT
MEANS TO BE A WITNESS.
HE IS WRONG ABOUT HAVING TO HAVE
A NO-CONTACT LIST OR A LIST OF
GOVERNMENT WITNESSES.
GOVERNMENT WITNESSES. HE IS WRONG ABOUT THE TYPE OF
METHODS THAT CAN BE USED TO
TAMPER WITH THE WITNESS."
SO SAYS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S
OFFICE PROSECUTOR.
OFFICE PROSECUTOR. AND THE JUDGE FOUND THAT IN FACT
MR. WESTLING, THE DEFENSE
COUNSEL, WAS HAVING AS BAD A DAY
AS IT SEEMED LIKE HE WAS HAVING
IN THAT MOMENT.
THE PROSECUTORS THEN WENT ON TO
SAY THAT PAUL MANAFORT HAD
CONTACTED THESE WITNESSES USING
ENCRYPTED APPS AND USING A
TECHNIQUE CALLED FOLDERING WHERE
HE WROTE E-MAILS, HE SAVED THE
E-MAILS IN A DRAFT FOLDER AND
THEN SENT THEM, THEN HE GIVES
SOMEBODY ELSE THE PASSWORD TO
THAT E-MAIL ACCOUNT SO THAT
OTHER PERSON COULD LOG INTO THE
E-MAIL ACCOUNT AND READ THAT
WRITTEN DRAFT THAT PAUL MANAFORT
HAD WRITTEN WITHOUT THE E-MAIL
ACTUALLY EVER BEING SENT OR
RECEIVED.
RECEIVED. IT’S SORT OF A
COUNTERSURVEILLANCE TRICK.
COUNTERSURVEILLANCE TRICK. SO THE PROSECUTORS EXPLAIN THAT
THAT’S WHAT MANAFORT HAS BEEN
DOING TO COMMUNICATE.
WE DIDN’T KNOW THAT BEFORE THIS
HEARING TODAY.
HEARING TODAY. BUT ESSENTIALLY THEY’RE SPELLING
OUT HOW MANAFORT HAS BEEN TRYING
TO EVADE SURVEILLANCE WHILE HE’S
BEEN BREAKING THE LAW AND
CONTACTING WITNESSES WHILE HE’S
OUT ON BAIL.
HERE’S GREG ANDRES, PROSECUTOR
FROM THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S
OFFICE.
OFFICE. "IT’S IMPORTANT TO NOTE AS WELL,
JUDGE, THAT THIS ISSUE WITH THE
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, THE
GOVERNMENT DIDN’T LEARN ABOUT
THAT BY SOMEHOW SUBPOENAING OR
MONITORING OR GETTING A SEARCH
WARRANT FOR MR. MANAFORT’S
COMMUNICATIONS.
COMMUNICATIONS. WE LEARNED ABOUT IT BECAUSE A
WITNESS IN THIS CASE, WHO WAS
PART OF THE GOVERNMENT’S
INVESTIGATION, BROUGHT FORTH THE
INFORMATION ABOUT THE TAMPERING.
AND THAT’S WHEN WE STARTED OUR
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. THAT’S WHEN WE ASKED THE COURT
FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO GIVE OUR
OPINION ABOUT BAIL.
AND THAT’S WHERE WE STARTED OUR
INVESTIGATION."
INVESTIGATION." SO THERE’S NO WAY TO MONITOR MR.
MANAFORT’S COMMUNICATIONS IN
SOME EFFECTIVE WAY.
THE ONLY CONDITION THAT DEFENSE
COUNSEL SUGGESTS WILL ADDRESS
THE ISSUE OF HIP HIM, MR.
MANAFORT, TAMPERING WITH
WITNESS-S A NO-CONTACT LIST.
IT’S JUST NOT SUFFICIENT TO
PROTECT THE COMMUNITY OR TO GIVE
THE COURT ANY CONFIDENCE THAT
MR. MANAFORT WILL NOT TRY TO
AGAIN.
AGAIN. IT’S NOT A SINGLE EPISODE.
IT’S A CAMPAIGN THAT TOOK PLACE
OVER FIVE WEEKS.
AS WE SIT HERE TODAY, JUDGE, MR.
MANAFORT HAS COMMITTED A CRIME
WHILE HE’S ON BAIL.
AS WE SIT HERE TODAY, JUDGE, MR.
MANAFORT IS OUT ON A $10 MILLION
RECOGNIZANCE BOND AND HE’S BEEN
INDICTED FOR A CRIME WHILE ON
BAIL."
BAIL." AND THE JUDGE RESPONDS, "THANK
YOU.
YOU. I WANT TO TAKE SOME TIME TO
ABSORB IT."
ABSORB IT." AND THEN AT THAT POINT THERE’S
ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT MORE
ARGUING, MORE PLEADING FROM
MANAFORT’S DEFENSE COUNSEL ABOUT
THE DELICATE BALANCING ACT THE
JUDGE SAYS IS NEEDED HERE.
THE JUDGE SAYS OKAY, TAKES A
15-MINUTE RECESS.
15-MINUTE RECESS. AND THEN SHE COMES BACK AND SHE
ISSUES HER RULING.
AND SHE EXPLAINS WHY SHE’S GOING
TO PUT THE PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN
CHAIRMAN IN JAIL.
AND THIS PART OF WHAT HAPPENED
TODAY, THIS IS THE PART THAT --
IT’S GOING TO MAKE YOUR KID
WHO’S WATCHING WITH YOU --
WATCHING THIS TONIGHT WITH YOU,
IT’S GOING TO MAKE YOUR KID WANT
TO GROW UP TO NOT BE JUST A
LAWYER AND TO DEFINITELY NOT
WANT TO BE A DEFENDANT.
THIS IS THE PART THAT’S MAYBE
GOING TO MAKE YOUR KID WANT TO
BE A JUDGE.
SO IF YOU DON’T WANT THAT, TIME
TO TURN ME OFF.
SO THE JUDGE COMES BACK FROM THE
15-MINUTE RECESS.
15-MINUTE RECESS. AND SHE SAYS, "THE TOUCHSTONE OF
THE BAIL REFORM ACT IS STILL AND
ALWAYS HAS BEEN FLIGHT AND
SAFETY," MEANING INGING RISK OF
BY THE DEFENDANT SO THEY
WOULDN’T HAVE TO GO TO TRIAL.
"FLIGHT AND SAFETY.
THE LAW IS CLEAR I CANNOT IMPOSE
PRETRIAL DETENTION TO PUNISH THE
DEFENDANT FOR THE ALLEGED
CONTACT IN THE NEW ALLEGATIONS.
SO I HAVE STRUGGLED WITH THE
DECISION.
DECISION. HERE I DON’T BELIEVE THERE’S ANY
CHANGE IN THE DEFENDANT’S RISK
OF FLIGHT.
OF FLIGHT. THE ADDITIONAL CHARGED DON’T
REALLY CHANGE THE CALCULUS THAT
MUCH GIVEN WHAT HE WAS ALREADY
FACING.
FACING. IS HE A DANGER?
WELL, THE GRAND JURY HAS FOUND
PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THE
DEFENDANT MR. MANAFORT HAS
ATTEMPTED TO CORRUPTLY PERSUADE
PEOPLE TO LIE.
THERE’S BEEN NO EVIDENCE OF EVEN
A THREAT OF HARM TO ANY PERSON.
WE DON’T HAVE WHAT ONE WOULD
CONSIDER THE TYPICAL SORT OF
HARM TO THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.
DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES BEING
PEDDLED ON THE CORNER, UNLAWFUL
POSSESSION OF FIREARMS.
THE HARM IN THIS CASE IS THE
HARM TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF
JUSTICE.
JUSTICE. IT’S THE HARM TO THE INTEGRITY
OF THE COURT SYSTEM."
AND THE JUDGE SAYS, "I’VE
WRESTLED WITH THIS.
WHAT CONDITIONS COULD THERE BE?
THIS IS NOT MIDDLE SCHOOL.
I CAN’T TAKE HIS CELL PHONE.
AND IF I SAY, WELL, DON’T CALL
THE 56 WITNESSES THAT DEFENSE
COUNSEL TELLS ME I NEED TO
CLEARLY LIST IN THIS ORDER, WILL
MANAFORT CALL THE 57th?
ALL THE DEFENDANT HAS SAID TO ME
IS, WELL, THERE WASN’T A CLEAR
ENOUGH ORDER SAYING NOT TO DO
IT.
IT. AND MY PROBLEM IS I DON’T THINK
I CAN DRAFT A CLEAR ENOUGH ORDER
TO COVER EVERY POSSIBLE FUTURE
VIOLATION OF THE UNITED STATES
CODE.
CODE. AND I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO.
I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS LONG AND
HARD, MR. MANAFORT.
I HAVE NO APPETITE FOR THIS.
BUT IN THE END I CANNOT TURN A
BLIND EYE TO THESE ALLEGATIONS.
GIVEN THE NUMBER OF CONTACTS,
THE PERSISTENCE OF THE CONTACTS,
AND THEIR OBVIOUS INTENT AND
IMPORT.
IMPORT. IT’S HOW THEY WERE PERCEIVED AND
RECEIVED BY THE PERSON TO WHOM
THEY WERE MADE.
AND THIS WITNESS TAMPERING
OCCURRED WHILE THE DEFENDANT WAS
ALREADY ON BOND AND ALREADY
UNDER AN ORDER BY ANOTHER JUDGE
TO NOT DO THIS.
THE INDICTMENT ALLEGES A CORRUPT
INTENT TO UNDERMINE THE
INTEGRITY AND TRUTH OF THE
FACT-FINDING PROCESS UPON WHICH
OUR SYSTEM OF JUSTICE DEPENDS.
THE DEFENSE SUGGESTED THAT IT
WAS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE
GOVERNMENT TO BRING THESE
MATTERS TO MY ATTENTION.
SO I WANT TO STAY QUITE CLEARLY
THAT IT ABSOLUTELY WAS NOT.
YOU STRUCK THAT NOTE REPEATEDLY
IN YOUR PAPERS.
BUT THIS HEARING IS NOT ABOUT
POLITICS.
POLITICS. IT’S NOT ABOUT THE CONDUCT OF
THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL.
IT’S ABOUT THE DEFENDANT’S
ALLEGED CONDUCT.
ALLEGED CONDUCT. I’M VERY TROUBLED BY THE
CONTACTS WITH THESE WITNESSES
ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE TAKEN PLACE
EVEN AFTER YOU WERE UNDER AN
EXPLICIT ORDER NOT TO CONTACT
WITNESSES DIRECTLY OR
INDIRECTLY.
INDIRECTLY. I AM CONCERNED YOU THAT SEEM
INCLINED TO TREAT THESE
PROCEEDINGS AS JUST ANOTHER
MARKETING EXERCISE AND NOT A
CRIMINAL CASE BROUGHT BY A DULY
APPOINTED FEDERAL PROSECUTOR IN
A FEDERAL COURT.
ALL OF THIS AT BOTTOM AFFECTS MY
JUDGMENT ABOUT WHETHER YOU CAN
BE TRUSTED TO COMPLY WITH THE
COURT’S DIRECTIVES.
COURT’S DIRECTIVES. THAT IS THE FINDING THAT THE
STATUTE ALSO REQUIRES ME TO MAKE
IF I RELEASE YOU.
AND I CAN’T MAKE IT.
YOU HAVE ABUSED THE TRUST PLACED
IN YOU SIX MONTHS AGO, AND
THEREFORE THE GOVERNMENT’S
MOTION WILL BE GRANTED AND THE
DEFENDANT WILL BE DETAINED
PENDING TRIAL AS OF TODAY."
MANAFORT’S DEFENSE COUNSEL,
"YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD ASK THAT
THE COURT STAY IN POSITION OF
ANY REMAND TO ALLOW US TO
APPEAL."
APPEAL." THE JUDGE THEN TURNS TO THE
PROSECUTORS, "WHAT’S THE
GOVERNMENT’S POSITION ON THAT?"
GREG ANDRES FROM THE SPECIAL
COUNSEL’S OFFICE SAYS, "JUDGE,
THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS TO
ADDRESS ANY OF THE CONCERNS OF
THE COURT.
THE COURT. THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS AS THE
COURT HAS FOUND TO GUARD AGAINST
THE DANGER TO THE COMMUNITY.
SO WE OPPOSE THAT APPLICATION."
AND THEN THE JUDGE SAYS, "AND
I’M ALSO CONCERNED THAT NOW THAT
I’VE ISSUED THIS ORDER THE RISK
OF FLIGHT HAS JUST MULTIPLIED
SUBSTANTIALLY."
SUBSTANTIALLY." SO, THE JUDGE SAYS, "I
APPRECIATE THE REQUEST FOR
APPEAL AND IT’S A SERIOUS
REQUEST, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT,
BUT I’M GOING TO DENY IT."
AND THAT’S HOW IT HAPPENED.
AND THEN THE PRESIDENT’S
CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN WAS TAKEN AWAY
TO JAIL.
TO JAIL. HE WAVED TO HIS WIFE.
HE WAS LED OUT OF THE COURTROOM.
A FEW MOMENTS AFTER HE WAS LED
OUT OF THE COURTROOM A U.S.
MARSHAL CAME BACK INTO THE
COURTROOM AND HANDED MRS.
MANAFORT HER HUSBAND’S WALLET