Len’s Letter #12
DELETIONS NOT NOTED. REVISIONS AND ADDITIONS CAPS)
BARR’S SUMMARY (LEN’S VERSION)
The Special Counsel submitted his 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 AT THIS TIME, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. THE REPORT LEAVES OPEN THE POSSIBILITY OF IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS BY CONGRESS OR INDICTMENTS AT A TIME WHEN PROSECUTORS ARE NOT CONSTRAINED BY JUSTICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES PROHIBITING INDICTMENTS OF A SITTING PRESIDENT.
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 SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE 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. The investigation found that members of the Trump Campaign met with REPRESENTATIVES OF the Russian government AS THEY UNDERTOOK election interference activities, SHARED INFORMATION WITH THEM AND RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THEM. NEVERTHELESS, THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF COORDINATED ACTIVITY TO IDENTIFY A CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
The Special Counsel 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. The Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate coordinated SUFFICIENTLY with the IRA in its efforts TO BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES ON THAT BASIS. THE Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.S
The second element involved the Russian MILITARY’S INTELLIGENCE AGENCY’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. 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. THERE WERE NOTABLE INSTANCES THAT CREATED THE APPEARANCE OF COORDINATION. DONALD TRUMP, FOR INSTANCE, CALLED PUBLICLY FOR THE RUSSIANS TO SEARCH FOR HILLARY CLINTON’S MISSING EMAILS. WITHIN FIVE HOURS OF THAT PUBLIC REQUEST, THE RUSSIAN AGENCY BEGAN EXAMINING HILLARY CLINTON’S PERSONAL EMAILS, WHICH THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY NEGLECTED.
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 Campaign 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, BASED ON THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE’S PROHIBITION AGAINST INDICTING A SITTING PRESIDENT AS WELL AS THE CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION OF IMPEACHMENT not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
THE REPORT SUMMARIZES TEN INSTANCES FOR CONSIDERATION OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICES CHARGES.
- THE CAMPAIGN’S RESPONSE TO REPORTS ABOUT RUSSIAN SUPPORT FOR TRUMP.
- THE PRESIDENT’S CONDUCT CONCERNING THE INVESTIGATION OF MICHAEL FLYNN.
- THE PRESIDENT’S REACTION TO PUBLIC CONFIRMATION OF THE FBI’S RUSSIA INVESTIGATION.
- EVENTS LEADING UP TO AND SURROUNDING THE TERMINATION OF FBI DIRECTOR COMEY.
- THE PRESIDENT’S EFFORTS TO REMOVE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL
- THE PRESIDENT’S EFFORTS TO CURTAIL THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION.
- THE PRESIDENT’S EFFORTS TO PREVENT DISCLOSURE OF EMAILS ABOUT THE JUNE 9, 2016 TRUMP TOWER MEETING.
- THE PRESIDENT’S FURTHER EFFORTS TO HAVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TAKE OVER THE INVESTIGATION.
- THE PRESIDENT’S CONDUCT TOWARD FLYNN, MANAFORT, AND TOWARD REDACTED INDIVIDUAL OR INDIVIDUALS.
- THE PRESIDENT’S CONDUCT INVOLVING MICHAEL COHEN.
Status of the Department’s Review
AFTER THE FULL DOCUMENT IS REVIEWED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS , AS MUCH OF THE DOCUMENT AS IS POSSIBLE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
TH