Thread by @Techno_Fog

Transcript on the cross-examination of the Special Counsel's star witness Rick Gates in the Paul Manafort case.

How much did he embezzle?

How many lies did he tell the Special Counsel during their investigation?

Thread.

Before cross-examination began, there was a bench discussion. Manafort's lawyer said he would get into how Gates stole money to fund his "secret life."

There was an agreement that they wouldn't bring up Gates' infidelity.

However, they were going to imply how he stole the money to finance his "separate secret life."

The special counsel didn't object to that.

Defense: "Do you recall when you first started giving false and misleading information to the Office of the Special Counsel?"

Gates avoids directly answering the question - indicating how he was coached by the Special Counsel.

Manafort's lawyer persists, and here we catch Rick Gates in his first lie:

"I didn't provide false and misleading information to the Special Counsel's office."

Their star witness just committed perjury.

Defense: If you didn't lie, then why did you plead guilty to providing false information?

Gates backtracks: "Under one instance I did."

Judge Ellis calls Gates out: "Well, so previously, you said you didn't provide false information."

Now Gates is blaming his "bad recollection" on why he pleaded guilty to lying to the Special Counsel.

The patience of Judge Ellis is wearing thin.

Judge: "You just said you just had a bad memory. Did you provide false information or did you have just a bad memory?"

Gates: "Your Honor, I provided false information to the Special Counsel prior to my plea agreement."

Who confronted Gates about his lies?

The equally crooked Andrew Weissmann. The Special Counsel was in a bind and had to charge their witness with lying or they'd lose all credibility with the jury.

Remember Gates blaming his memory on why he was charged with lying to the Special Counsel?

Manafort's lawyer now gets him to admit that he "knowingly and intentionally lied."

Now, this part was a bit muddled, but Manafort's lawyer is getting to the point that he thinks Gates embezzled $350,000 from a Cyproit account for an investment deal.

Gates now "can't recall" telling the Special Counsel about unauthorized transactions from the Cyproit accounts.

He can't pick out the transactions he told the Special Counsel were authorized.

But he had a perfect memory when questioned by the Special Counsel during direct.

Defense: Did you perpetrate a scheme to take money from offshore accounts?

Gates: "It wasn't a scheme. I just added expense numbers to the reports."

The jury must have been rolling their eyes at this point.

Manafort's lawyer brings up how Gates would falsify expense reports to pay off his AmEx.

Defense: "That included substantial personal expenditures?"

Gates avoids answering yet again: "Yes, that's possible."

Defense: Was that the $125K you stole from a SunTrust account?

Gates: "I don't know what you're referring to."

Did the Special Counsel question you about closing the SunTrust account?

Gates: "I don't recall"

This guy has ZERO credibility.

Manafort's lawyer has the notes from the Special Counsel's interviews with Gates. It seems like Weissmann caught Gates in another lie, this time about the SunTrust account.

Conveniently, Gates can't recall being confronted by Weissmann.

Now Gates is asked if he orchestrated a scheme to steal from Trump's inaugural committee.

He can't recall what he told the Special Counsel about that, either.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills - Gates keeps contradicting himself.

Here he switches from "I don't recall" to "it's possible" when asked about submitting expenses to the inaugural committee.

Gates denies embezzling money to pay for his "secret life" that was mentioned in the bench discussion at the start of this thread.

Another lie.

Whoa.

Rick Gates was helping run a Ponzi scheme - and falsifying financial documents - separate from his work with Manafort?

The Special Counsel confronted Gates with potential fraud charges in that business venture.. all of which would go away if he cooperated.

Yet more crimes/financial violations. It goes on and on. This time for insider trading with a company called "ID Watchdog" on the eve of an IPO.

Manafort's lawyers moves on to Gates' false tax returns.

Gates can't recall being confronted with leaving off "well over $1 million" on his amended return.

He can't recall if it was a large number. He can't recall "what it related to."

This is interesting. Gates is asked about being interviewed about his time with the Trump campaign.

The Special Counsel objects. The next 6 pages are sealed. No idea what happened. (But the next line of questioning has to do with 2010 wire transfers)

Here we see exactly how Gates embezzled money.

In this example, Gates falsified multiple documents to steal $65,000 from Manafort.

Next: how Gates stole $120,000 by creating "a false and phony invoice"

This (verbatim) interaction is good...

Defense: Why won't you say "embezzlement"?

Gates: What difference does it make?

Defense: Why won't you say "embezzlement"?

Gates: It was embezzlement from Mr. Manafort.

Meanwhile, the Special Counsel pipes up and gets smacked down.

Special Counsel: "Judge, could we have questions and answers as opposed to a discussion here?"

Judge: "I don't see that as an objection. I'll overrule it."

This line of questioning is important - there is no paper trial. It's a question of whether the jury believes Gates.

"This jury is supposed to just believe you; is that correct?"

"Yes, they are."

Now Manafort's lawyer goes for blood.

Defense: After all the lies you told and fraud you've committed, you expect this jury to believe you?

Gates: Yes.

Defense: Uncorroborated?

Gates: Yes.

Defense: Can you return the money you stole from Manafort?

Gates: No, I cannot.

Defense: So you're really not taking responsibility, are you?

Gates: On that subject, no.

Last set of questioning before the day wrapped up.

Gates: "Mr. Manafort was very good about knowing where the money is and knowing where to spend it."

Judge Ellis: "Well, he missed the amounts of money you stole from him, though, didn't he?"

/end