Congress on Sunday got its first peak into what
special counsel Robert Mueller found after years investigating Russian
interference in the 2016 election and any possible collusion with President
Donald Trump's campaign.
The summary was compiled by Attorney General
William Barr and put into a four-page sent to Congress. It was created after
Barr spent days reading through Mueller's lengthy investigation, which was
completed on Friday. It does not answer key questions that have hung over
Trump's presidency, specifically whether the president committed the crime of
obstruction of justice.
"While this report does not conclude that the
president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him," the letter
says on whether the president obstructed justice.
The report does conclude that the Trump campaign did
not conspire with Russia during the 2016 election, according to the letter from
Barr to Congress. It notes that Mueller's investigation found the campaign was given "multiple offers from
Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign" but no one
within the campaign or "anyone associated with it" conspired with
Russia.
While the summary could help quell some of the questions and
mystery surrounding the ultra-secretive report, lawmakers on both sides of the
aisle have said they will push for a full disclosure of the report.
Mueller's report, which remains in the hands of Barr, marked
the end of an investigation launched in secret months before Trump was elected,
when the FBI began gathering clues that made them suspicious of aides to
Trump's campaign.
The probe mushroomed to include whether the campaign coordinated
with Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, and whether the
president himself attempted to obstruct it. And it produced a cascade of other
criminal investigations targeting people around Trump, which have not yet
concluded.
The investigation led to the indictment of 34 people and
three companies on scores of charges. Dozens of Russian nationals were charged
with hacking Democratic computers and spreading disinformation during the
campaign. Several Trump aides were convicted of lying to Congress or
investigators, or for campaign-finance violations or for tax and bank fraud.
Read Barr's letter to Congress in full below, outlining the
conclusions of Mueller's investigation:
Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member
Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins: As a supplement to the notification
provided on Friday, March 22, 2019, I am writing today to advise you of the
principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller Ill and to
inform you about the status of my initial review of the report he has prepared.
The Special Counsel's Report On Friday, the Special Counsel submitted to me a
"confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination
decisions" he has reached, as required by 28 C.F.R. 600.8(c). This report
is entitled "Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the
2016 Presidential Election." Although my review is ongoing, I believe that
it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the
principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his
investigation. The report explains that the Special Counsel and his staff
thoroughly investigated allegations that members of the presidential campaign
of Donald J. Trump, and others associated with it, conspired with the Russian
government in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election,
or sought to obstruct the related federal investigations. In the report, the
Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19
lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents,
intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The
Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search
warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued
almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign
governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses. The
Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals
and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been
publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel
also referred several matters to other offices for further action. The report
does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain
any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. Below, I summarize the
principal conclusions set out in the Special Counsel's report. Russian
Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. The Special Counsel's
report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the
Special Counsel's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S.
presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the
election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian
government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a
primary consideration for the Special Counsel's investigation was whether any
Americans including individuals associated with the Trump campaign — joined the
Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime.
The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or
anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts
to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states:
"[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign
conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election
interference activities. "l The Special Counsel's investigation determined
that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The
first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency
(IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United
States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering
with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any
U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly
coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought
criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in
connection with these activities. The second element involved the Russian
government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather
and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel
found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and
obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and
Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials
through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities,
the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian
military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States
for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special
Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it,
conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite
multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump
campaign. 1 In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the Special Counsel also
considered whether members of the Trump campaign "coordinated" with
Russian election interference activities. The Special Counsel defined
"coordination" as an "agreement—tacit or express—between the
Trump Camparusign and the Russian government on election interference."
Obstruction of Justice. The report's second part addresses a number of actions
by the President — most of which have been the subject of public reporting —
that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising
obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a "thorough factual
investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether
to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and
declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional
prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion
— one way or the other — as to whether the examined conduct constituted
obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report
sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the
Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact
concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as
obstruction. The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not
conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate
him." The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his
obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to
the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report
constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special
Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials
regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special
Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final
report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the
Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution
that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I
have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's
investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an
obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to,
and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the
indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.[1] In making this
determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that "the
evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime
related to Russian election interference," and that, while not
determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent
with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an
obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable
doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct
with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing
the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report
identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct,
had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt
intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution
guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt
to establish an obstruction-ofjustice offense. Status of the Department's
Review The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel's report
will be a "confidential report" to the Attorney General. See Office
of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 37,038, 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have
previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter.
For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special
Counsel's report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and
Departmental policies. Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel and my
initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or
could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), which imposes
restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to
"matter[s] occurring before [a] grand jury." Fed. R. Crim. P.
6(e)(2)(B). Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury
information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6(e)
material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain
circumstances. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. 401
(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and
ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are
used strictly for their intended criminal justice function. Given these
restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly
the Department can identify the 6(e) material that by law cannot be made
public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying
all 6(e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible.
Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other
ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other
offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move
forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of
applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies. As I observed in my
initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that "the
Attorney General may determine that public release of' notifications to your
respective Committees "would be in the public interest." 28 C.F.R.
600.9(c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public
after delivering it to you. [1] See A Sitting President 's Amenability to
Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222 (2000).
No comments:
Post a Comment