Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Robert Mueller’s team just had a really rough day in court

Judge T.S. Ellis III questioned whether Mueller had just charged Manafort to try to “get” President Trump.

Paul Manafort, who’s facing charges from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, departs a courthouse
Paul Manafort, who’s facing charges from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, departs a courthouse
Paul Manafort, who’s facing charges from special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, departs a courthouse.
Mark Wilson/Getty
Andrew Prokop
Andrew Prokop is a senior politics correspondent at Vox, covering the White House, elections, and political scandals and investigations. He’s worked at Vox since the site’s launch in 2014, and before that, he worked as a research assistant at the New Yorker’s Washington, DC, bureau.

A federal judge expressed skepticism about special counsel Robert Mueller’s wide-reaching probe Friday morning during a hearing related to charges Paul Manafort is facing in Virginia.

Judge T.S. Ellis III suggested that he suspected Mueller’s team only charged Manafort with 18 counts of bank fraud and other charges in Virginia as a way to “get” to President Donald Trump — and suggested Mueller shouldn’t have “unfettered power” to do that, NBC’s Ken Dilanian reports.

To recap: Manafort, who chaired Trump’s presidential campaign, has been indicted in two different venues — in Washington, DC, back in October, and on further charges in Virginia in February.

In Virginia, Mueller’s team has charged Manafort with five counts of filing false income tax returns, four counts of failing to report foreign bank and financial accounts, and nine counts of bank fraud or bank conspiracy, related to his handling of money he made doing work for Ukraine’s government.

This was a hearing in the Virginia case, for which the trial is currently scheduled to take place in July. Manafort has filed a motion to dismiss this indictment — arguing that Mueller overreached his mandate by charging him with crimes unrelated to Russian interference with the campaign.

Judge Ellis suggested Mueller’s team just wants Trump’s impeachment

When Manafort’s team made this same argument in court in DC, the presiding judge, Amy Berman Jackson, seemed skeptical. (She hasn’t yet ruled on the motion, though she did dismiss an accompanying civil suit filed by Manafort.)

But Manafort may have found a more receptive audience with Judge Ellis, in Virginia, a 77-year-old Ronald Reagan appointee.

“I don’t see what relation this indictment has with what the special counsel is authorized to investigate,” Ellis said, according to Politico’s Josh Gerstein. “What you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment.”

Though Ellis didn’t issue a ruling, Brandi Buchman of Courthouse News reports that he asked to review an unredacted copy of a memo from last August, in which Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein authorized Mueller to investigate crimes related to Manafort’s Ukraine work. Mueller’s team revealed the memo’s existence in court filings, but the vast majority of it is redacted.

If Ellis does in fact end up dismissing Manafort’s Virginia indictment (and, for what it’s worth, many smart court reporters are skeptical that he ultimately will), it wouldn’t get Manafort completely out of the woods, as he’d still face charges in Washington. But it would be a dramatic defeat for Mueller, with major implications for his strategy as a whole — which, it seems, has relied heavily on bringing or threatening unrelated charges against Trump associates to try to get them to “flip.”

See More:

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters