12

According to the information contained in the Mueller Report, was there a conspiracy between the Trump Campaign and Russia? By conspiracy, I mean both the legal definition and in an informal sense; that is: did the Trump Campaign knowingly deal with Russian agents to gain an election advantage?

I'd like to keep this question focused only on the question of whether there was an actual conspiracy, not on obstruction of justice or other crimes that may have been uncovered. In addition, I'd like to focus on information contained in the Mueller Report, not on information from other sources.

Also, could citations be from the Mueller report instead of media conclusions about the report? I would like to keep out as many intermediaries as possible to reduce claims of bias.

17

No, there was no conspiracy to the extent that criminal charges for conspiring with the Russians could be brought against members of the Trump campaign

My answer is based on the quote below from the executive summary of the first volume of the Mueller report (page 9 of the first volume, page 17 in the linked pdf).

In the report this constitutes one paragraph, but I split it in smaller chunks to improve readability (emphasis is mine).

Second, while the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges. Among other things, the evidence was not sufficient to charge any Campaign official as an unregistered agent of the Russian government or other Russian principal.

And our evidence about the June 9, 2016 meeting and WikiLeaks’s releases of hacked materials was not sufficient to charge a criminal campaign-finance violation. Further, the evidence was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.

20

Regarding the legal definition, Mueller did not establish criminal conspiracy:

the report is very clear that Mueller’s investigation did not establish that the Trump campaign criminally conspired on illegal Russian election interference, or that it coordinated with Russia through either an active or tacit agreement.

Using your definition - knowingly deal with Russian agents to gain an election advantage - the matter is a bit less clear. Mueller 'uncovered “evidence of numerous links” between Donald Trump campaign officials and individuals with or claiming ties to the Russian government'. Eg:

  • 1
    Hi Tim, would it be possible to replace those links, or any of them, with parts of the actual report as the OP requested? There's a handy interactive version on the New York Times site – iain Apr 20 at 14:36
  • 1
    There's a very big difference between "there was no conspiracy" and "the report did not establish that there was a conspiracy". It's possible to interpret the former as exonerating the subjects of the report, when it was made very clear in the report that the subjects were not exonerated. The first sentence's phrasing should be changed so as not to mislead in this way. – probably_someone Apr 20 at 18:07
  • 2
    @iain OP changed the question after my answer was posted. If I find the time, I'll add those, but it's a lot of work and I'm not sure it's worth it. Primary sources definitely have their benefits, but I don't see a reason to distrust reputable media outlets. But if there are reasons to doubt some of the specific points, then references to the primary source are definitely useful. – tim Apr 20 at 18:15
  • 2
    @probably_someone I updated my answer to be more specific. – tim Apr 20 at 18:17
  • 2
    @tim That's fine about the effort (it's not us under investigation:) though on the "I don't see a reason to distrust reputable media outlets" I actually came here after reading a list in the NY Post that includes many times journalists lied about this! (o_º) I think we may have entered an age of needing primary sources, unfortunately. – iain Apr 21 at 1:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.