[Special Counsel's Office]
May 17, 2017 DOJ Press Release: "Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein today announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters."
March 22, 2019: Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report sent to the Attorney General.
March 24, 2019: Attorney General Barr releases summary of Special
Counsel Robert Mueller's report.
[PDF]
The
Attorney
General
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
March 24, 2019
| The Honorable
Lindsey Graham Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate 290 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 |
The Honorable Jerrold Nadler Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives 2132 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 The Honorable Doug Collins Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives 1504 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 |
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 III 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."1
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.
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 itto 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. 2
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.
Sincerely,
William P. Barr
Attorney General
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 governmnt on election interference."
2. See A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222 (2000).
REACTIONS
Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
MUELLER STATEMENT
Arlington, VA – In response to the conclusion of the Special Counsel and Robert Mueller's report, Brad Parscale, Campaign Manager to Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., released the following statement."Today marks the day that President Trump has been completely and fully vindicated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, exposing the Russia collusion conspiracy theory for the sham that it always was and catching Democrats in an elaborate web of lies and deceit.
After issuing 2,800 subpoenas and 500 search warrants, interviewing 500 witnesses, employing 40 FBI agents and 19 lawyers, and spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, Robert Mueller concluded unequivocally, '[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.' Moreover, the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General determined that there was no evidence of obstruction of justice.
Nevertheless, Democrats took us on a frantic, chaotic, conspiracy-laden roller coaster for two years, alleging wrongdoing where there was none. So distraught and blindsided by the results of the 2016 elections, Democrats lied to the American people continually, hoping to undo the legitimate election of President Trump. Their dirty tricks have not ended. Even today Democrats have picked up the disgraceful mantle of investigating, obstructing, and destroying the will of the American people at any cost. They failed once and they will fail again.
Despite a roving Special Counsel and desperate Democrats trailing him every step of the way, President Trump has kept his focus where it belongs: achieving for the American people. He is making historic economic progress that benefits all Americans, all to Make America Great Again.
The American people should take notice: the Democrats have lied to you, while President Trump has been hard at work building a booming economy and making you safer."
RNC Statement on the Conclusion of the Mueller Investigation
WASHINGTON — Republican
National
Committee
(RNC)
Chairwoman
Ronna
McDaniel released the
following statement on the conclusion of the Mueller investigation:
"This is a great day for all Americans," said Chairwoman McDaniel. "As we have said all along, there was no collusion and no obstruction. Now that this investigation is over, Democrats need to finally end their baseless investigations and political crusade against President Trump for the good of the country."
"This is a great day for all Americans," said Chairwoman McDaniel. "As we have said all along, there was no collusion and no obstruction. Now that this investigation is over, Democrats need to finally end their baseless investigations and political crusade against President Trump for the good of the country."
###
_________________
· The Department of Justice also found no evidence of obstruction of justice concerning the investigation.
· The Mueller investigation will go down in history as one of the widest ranging and most expensive Special Counsel investigations ever.
_________________
The Witch Hunt Verdict: No Collusion, No Witches
After Spending A Whole Lot Of Cash And Finding No Evidence Of Collusion, The Special Counsel’s Office Has Closed Their Investigation Into The 2016 ElectionTOP
TAKEAWAYS
· After 675 days, an enormous amount of manpower and
resources, the Attorney General’s office reported today that the
Special Counsel found no evidence of collusion in the 2016 election.· The Department of Justice also found no evidence of obstruction of justice concerning the investigation.
· The Mueller investigation will go down in history as one of the widest ranging and most expensive Special Counsel investigations ever.
o The total reported
cost of the Special Counsel’s investigation through September 2018 was
$25,215,853.00.
o The cost per day of the investigation through Mueller’s latest expense report, September 30th, 2018, was $50, 230.00 dollars per day, making it the second most expensive investigation in the history of the Special Counsel’s office.
o The Special Counsel’s office had at least 19 attorneys on staff, 12 more attorneys than the Starr investigation had upon commencing operations in 1994.
· After intensive investigations in Congress, the House and
Senate Intelligence Committees along with the Senate Judiciary
Committee all found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign
and Russia. o The cost per day of the investigation through Mueller’s latest expense report, September 30th, 2018, was $50, 230.00 dollars per day, making it the second most expensive investigation in the history of the Special Counsel’s office.
o The Special Counsel’s office had at least 19 attorneys on staff, 12 more attorneys than the Starr investigation had upon commencing operations in 1994.
o Since May 2017,
these Congressional committees held at least 28 hearings and
interviewed more than 100 individuals related to their investigations
into the 2016 election.
o A combined 31 Congressmen are lawyers that sit on these committees.
o Total committee funding during the 115th Congress for the House Intelligence Committee and the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees was at least $41 million.
· The combined focus of the Special Counsel’s
investigation, Congressional investigations, and the focus of the
media, made the 2016 Russia investigation one of the broadest and most
widely scrutinized investigations in history.o A combined 31 Congressmen are lawyers that sit on these committees.
o Total committee funding during the 115th Congress for the House Intelligence Committee and the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees was at least $41 million.
o Over the past two
years, The Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN, and
MSNBC reported extensively on the Russia Investigation, writing over
8,500 articles on the Mueller Investigation, or nearly 13 articles per
day.
o Combined, Congress and the Special Counsel’s office interviewed more than 600 witnesses on the Russia Investigation.
o Between the Special Counsel’s Office and Congress, at least 50 lawyers worked on the investigation.
· To put these numbers in perspective:o Combined, Congress and the Special Counsel’s office interviewed more than 600 witnesses on the Russia Investigation.
o Between the Special Counsel’s Office and Congress, at least 50 lawyers worked on the investigation.
o With the $25,215,853
million dollars spent by the Special Counsel’s Office, Rep. Adam Schiff
(D-CA) could attend Harvard Law School for the next 263 years.
o The combined number of attorneys in the Special Counsel’s team and lawyers serving on the Congressional Committees would make the 19th largest law firm in the state of Virginia.
o The Washington Post has written 192 more stories concerning the Russia Investigation than they have regarding the Administration’s defeat of ISIS.
o The New York Times has written 644 more stories concerning the Russia investigation than stories on the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
o CNN has written 906 more stories concerning the Russia Investigation than stories on the Trump Administration’s tax cuts for the middle class.
o MSNBC has written 4,202 total stories mentioning the Mueller investigation.
o The combined number of attorneys in the Special Counsel’s team and lawyers serving on the Congressional Committees would make the 19th largest law firm in the state of Virginia.
o The Washington Post has written 192 more stories concerning the Russia Investigation than they have regarding the Administration’s defeat of ISIS.
o The New York Times has written 644 more stories concerning the Russia investigation than stories on the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
o CNN has written 906 more stories concerning the Russia Investigation than stories on the Trump Administration’s tax cuts for the middle class.
o MSNBC has written 4,202 total stories mentioning the Mueller investigation.
Americans for Limited Government
No conspiracy or coordination with Russia on election interference, no obstruction of justice clears President Trump of wrongdoing
March 24, 2019, Fairfax, Va.—Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement in response to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s determination that “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities” and Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s determination finding “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-of justice offense”“Attorney General William Barr’s letter to Congress on Robert Mueller’s special counsel final report on the Russia collusion investigation makes it clear that the President and all his team are unambiguously exonerated from having anything to do with Russian interference in the 2016 election. Mueller’s report, according to Barr, acknowledges that this alleged Russia collusion was a ‘primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation…’
“This should end forever the Democratic Party created fantasy that President Trump and his campaign were in some way working with the Russians to impact the results of 2016 presidential election.
“However, many will cling to the idea that somehow the President ‘obstructed justice’ in this process as Mueller neither exonerates nor condemns the actions of the President or any member of his team in his report leaving that determination to the Attorney General. Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein make it clear in their letter to Congress that there was no obstruction of justice, exonerating the President and his team due to the fact that the essential elements of obstruction of justice were not found by the Special Counsel, including most importantly any underlying crime to obstruct.
“Regardless of the Mueller report and the Attorney General’s findings, the left will continue to cry obstruction of justice in the months ahead in an attempt to save face for dragging the nation through two years of doubt about the legitimacy of the Trump presidency. In doing so, the Democrats and some never Trumpers will be making the underlying claim that an innocent person targeted in a criminal investigation has no right to defend themselves publicly during the course of that investigation. This is absurd on its face and is nothing more than an attempt to obscure their own roles in this sordid attempt to take down a duly elected President.
“In light of the Mueller findings, the President should immediately pardon anyone who was convicted of a process crime resulting from the Mueller investigation, and the Attorney General should begin work on getting to the bottom of who perpetrated this Russia collusion fraud on the American public and begin the process of prosecuting them with the same vigor exhibited against the President and his team.”
To view online: https://getliberty.org/2019/
Attachments:
“Without collusion, there is no obstruction,” By Robert Romano, July 31, 2018 at http://dailytorch.com/2018/07/
Interview Availability: Please contact Americans for Limited Government at 703-383-0880 ext. 1 or at media@limitgov.org to arrange an interview.
###
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer
Pelosi, Schumer Joint Statement On Attorney General Barr’s Summary Of The Mueller Report
Washington, D.C. – Today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer released the following statement regarding Attorney General Barr’s summary of the Mueller report:
“Attorney General Barr’s letter raises as many questions as it answers. The fact that Special Counsel Mueller’s report does not exonerate the president on a charge as serious as obstruction of justice demonstrates how urgent it is that the full report and underlying documentation be made public without any further delay. Given Mr. Barr’s public record of bias against the Special Counsel’s inquiry, he is not a neutral observer and is not in a position to make objective determinations about the report.
“And most obviously, for the president to say he is completely exonerated directly contradicts the words of Mr. Mueller and is not to be taken with any degree of credibility.
“Congress requires the full report and the underlying documents so that the Committees can proceed with their independent work, including oversight and legislating to address any issues the Mueller report may raise. The American people have a right to know.”
Copyright © 2019 Eric M. Appleman/Democracy in
Action.
All rights reserved.