gives them immunity. that means they can t be prosecuted, so they can no longer refuse to testify. we don t know who the witnesses are yet, but i m certain they have gone through the process, they re going to be critical witnesses for the government. we heard a rundown of all of the evidence. some of the 500 pieces of evidence. anything stand out to you there? this is going to be a document-intensive case. i think it s very clear that manafort at least had partial ownership of all of these accounts. and there s no question that money was being moved through these accounts and taxes were not being paid. the only way you can defend a document case like this is to show that you didn t know what was going on, or you didn t know it was wrong. so the government s going to lay out all kind of documents, over 400 exhibits. i have no idea what sort of defense manafort s going to have to that. the thing is, this case started as a russia investigation, right, into potential interference and
with both the prosecution and the defense, telling them they re not allowed to make any public statements, any public representations about this case. all of their argumentation on the matter of this case against manafort and this case against gates, all of the argumentation must happen in the courtroom and in the courtroom only. that gag order happened after manafort s law walked out of court the morning of the indictment and made a big rambling statement to reporters about how innocent his client was. after that gag order. there s a gag order in your case. you can t talk to reporters about your case. you also cannot publish op-ed columns about your case. but this is from the filing tonight. even if the ghost-written op-ed were entirely accurate, fair and balanced, it would be a violation of this court s november 8th gag order if it had been published. the editorial clearly was undertaken to influence the public s opinion of defense manafort, or else there would be no reason to seek