Court hearing on leaks

Manafort seeks court hearing on leaks

By JOSH GERSTEIN

Paul Manafort, the former Trump campaign manager, is demanding a hearing into a flurry of media leaks that his defense says unfairly accused him of improper collusion with the Russian government.

Lawyers for Manafort, who is facing separate indictments in two federal courts, argued in a motion filed Monday night that government officials had engaged in repeated leaks of classified information, grand jury secrets and sensitive investigative details that have jeopardized his right to a fair trial.

Manafort’s effort to raise the profile of the leak issue in connection with his prosecution could draw the attention and the favor of President Donald Trump, who has railed against what he contends are illegal leaks from the FBI and elsewhere. Many analysts believe Manafort’s best strategy for escaping punishment in the cases he is involved in is to obtain a pardon from Trump either now or after the midterm elections in November.

“By their actions, it is self-evident that the objective of these government sources was to create unfair prejudice against Mr. Manafort and thereby deprive him of his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights,” attorneys Kevin Downing and Thomas Zehnle wrote in the new motion. “The government’s investigation, and the criminal charges that ultimately resulted from it, are the epitome of a party seeking to decide a case in the press and not the courtroom.”

Manafort’s defense team said that it had repeatedly requested from prosecutors evidence of intercepted conversations between the longtime political consultant and Russian officials, but that none had been produced. The defense lawyers say this strongly suggests that some of the sources were fabricating claims that the U.S. government had such information.

“The government-sourced leaks concerning surveillance of Mr. Manafort with foreign individuals is particularly troubling,” the defense wrote. “Despite multiple discovery … requests in this regard, the Special Counsel has not produced any materials to the defense — no tapes, notes, transcripts or other material evidencing surveillance or intercepts of communications between Mr. Manafort and Russian intelligence officials, Russian government officials (or any other foreign officials.) The Office of Special Counsel has advised there are no materials responsive to Mr. Manafort’s requests.”

A spokesman for Mueller’s office declined to comment.

Manafort is not charged with any campaign-related crimes nor with any illegal conspiracy with Russian officials. The charges he faces in Washington, however, do allege that he worked with pro-Russian individuals on a campaign to lobby for Ukraine in the U.S. without legally registering as a foreign agent. Manafort is also accused of money laundering in that case.

But the motion filed Monday night was brought in the case Manafort is facing in Virginia, where he’s accused of bank fraud, tax fraud and failing to file reports on foreign bank accounts he controlled.

Manafort’s attorneys argue that the disclosures appear to have been part of a deliberate effort to prompt the appointment of a special counsel. The lawyers also repeated their contention that Mueller’s investigation is tainted by an unwarranted expansion to cover matters not directly related to Russia. The former Trump campaign chairman has filed motions in both federal courts challenging the legality of Mueller’s appointment.

Manafort’s defense says the leaks may have been “intentionally designed to create a false narrative in order to garner support for the appointment of a special counsel” despite the lack of evidence of coordination with the Russians.

“If this proves to be true, then Mr. Manafort should not have been referred to the Special Counsel for investigation of coordination with the Russian government, nor for any other matters,” Downing and Zehnle wrote. “Simply put, without original jurisdiction to investigate Mr. Manafort for alleged coordination with the Russian government during the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, the Special Counsel had — and has — no lawful authority or jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Mr. Trump for the matters that he has brought in [Virginia] and in the District of Columbia.”

Manafort’s defense seeks a hearing on the leak issue, although it is not immediately clear what that would entail. The motion cites reports from The New York Times, The Associated Press, the Los Angeles Times, CNN and BuzzFeed that the defense contends are based on improper or illegal leaks, but does not say whether or not Manafort wants the authors of those articles to testify about their sources. It appears Manafort wants Mueller’s office to come forward with some proof that government officials were not the sources of the articles.

Few of the media reports cite evidence of direct communications between Russian government officials and Manafort. While some early articles made such claims, more recent reporting has referred to Manafort as interacting with individuals who have ties to Russian intelligence.

Mueller’s team has filed on the public record in the Washington case email communications between Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian-Ukrainian national who was a close aide to Manafort when he worked on a presidential campaign and other matters related to Ukraine. Prosecutors have indicated in court filings that the FBI believes Kilimnik has ties to Russian intelligence and that at least one other aide to Manafort, Rick Gates, was aware of those ties.

Gates was initially charged with Manafort in the Washington case, but pleaded guilty in February to conspiracy against the United States and lying to federal agents. Gates is now cooperating with prosecutors.

Manafort is set to go on trial in the Virginia case on July 10 and in the Washington case on Sept. 17.