At some point, Special Counsel Robert Mueller will complete his investigation. He could bring criminal charges, name other co-conspirators, comment on possible grounds for impeachment, or determine that no further legal action is necessary.
Whatever his decision, a significant number of Americans will likely disagree with the outcome.… continue »
[Update] On Thursday, news outlets reported that President Donald Trump has been consulting with his lawyers about granting pardons in the Russia investigation, including a potential self-pardon. Those bombshell reports came after one of Trump’s personal lawyers, Jay Sekulow, refused to rule out the possibility that the president would pardon his associates, or even himself, in the Russia investigation.… continue »
On Wednesday, three victims of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) cybertheft and subsequent document release by WikiLeaks filed a federal lawsuit against Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and Roger Stone. While there are many hurdles to be cleared, this litigation could eventually become a vehicle for discovery of documents and evidence in a judicial proceeding driven by private litigants.… continue »
As a potential crime under the campaign finance laws, the Trump campaign collusion with the Russians is well documented. As I contended in a recent essay, there is substantial evidence in plain sight. The President applauded a foreign government for its interference in the election and suggested that he would be happy to see more of the same.… continue »
Commentary on Russian intervention in the 2016 elections has included one confidently expressed and perhaps growing view: that there may be a scandal there, but no conceivable crime. It is claimed that the Trump campaign could wink and nod at Russian hacking, and derive the full benefit, but that without considerably more evidence of direct involvement, there is no role for criminal law enforcement. … continue »
Public discussion of the FBI’s ongoing investigation into Russian influence on the 2016 election is dominated by the question of collusion: Were senior members of the Trump campaign knowing collaborators in the Russian government’s campaign to undermine Hillary Clinton’s candidacy? My own view is that we’re unlikely to get any truly conclusive evidence of this—but also that it’s a mistake to treat it as the only important question for an investigation to answer.… continue »
During summer of the 2016 presidential campaign, the FBI obtained a warrant from a secret court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, to monitor a Donald Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page due to Page’s communications with Russian agents, according to the Washington Post.… continue »
[Editor’s Note: This post is part of a Just Security symposium on retired lieutenant general Michael Flynn’s legal jeopardy. Ready Alex’s earlier post, “Flynn’s Public Offer to Testify for Immunity Suggests He May Have Nothing to Say.” And stay tuned for more coverage specific to Flynn.… continue »
About a week ago, I wrote a pair of posts about the increasing insinuation in various camps that, if in fact the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to influence the outcome of the 2016 election, then those responsible might be guilty of treason.… continue »
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn told the FBI and Congress that he is willing to testify in exchange for immunity. But it’s not a serious offer, and it suggests he has nothing to say (or is not willing to say anything that would incriminate others).… continue »
