Good morning Hank, it’s Tuesday. So today I want to discuss what we know about the relationship between Donald Trump's Presidential Campaign and the Russian government's interference in our 2016 Elections, but first a couple notes. Russia is a large and vastly diverse country, with over 144 million citizens. But in the context here of Election meddling we are specifically referring to Vladimir Putin’s government. The US and Russia are currently enemies. Putin's regime has sought to undermine democracy and democratic institutions around the world and in the US's view invaded a sovereign nation, but whether the United States and Russia are friends is not actually that relevant to the legal questions at hand. Also there is a lot of speculation about this story online for the purposes of this video I'm only going to refer to events that have either been confirmed by the people who participated in them or reported independently by two separate news organizations.
Sources can be found in the video info below. Let’s get started… The Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence have stated with high confidence that the Russian government sought to influence the outcome of the US Presidential election favoring Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton They have also stated that Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, personally oversaw this operation, which actually shouldn't come as that much of a surprise.
The Putin regime has a history of trying to sway foreign elections and, also, Trump's policy positions were broadly much more favorable to Putin than Clinton's policy positions. I mean, as far back as 2007 Trump said that Putin was "doing a great job". Trump’s campaign removed proposed language from the official republican party platform concerning Ukraine and their ongoing war with Russia. So the Putin regime interfered in our election at least in three ways.  They created and shared incorrect news stories through a disinformation campaign  In order to attempt to compromise election data in many states,  Hacking John Podesta, the leader of the Democratic National Committee, to gain access to their emails. They then gave them to Wikileaks. Although you may not believe it all, Wikileaks or the Russian government both deny it. However, there is overwhelming agreement within US intelligence circles as well among Republican and Democratic members who, as you may know, have difficulty finding common ground on almost anything. The email hack was particularly significant because it caused a large imbalance of information. The public had access to all these democratic emails, many of which one might charitably describe as sleazy, but not to any similar Republican emails that might have existed It's a bit like saying: "Can you believe all this crap in candidate X's tax returns," when candidate Y doesn't release their tax returns at all.
Now you can say, and you ought to, that political parties just shouldn't be sleazy. It created a problem, but that’s not my point.
Information imbalance. We can fix this by selecting which emails we see.
Putin had a lot to say in the election narrative. Of course none of that means the election was illegitimate – it wasn't – or that Trump didn't win – he did. And benefitting from a foreign government's propaganda initiative is not a crime. However, colluding with that government *is*. Probably. According to US election law, a foreign national must vote.
They cannot contribute or make any donation, regardless of whether they are Martian, Russian, or Canadian.
anything of value in relation to a US election. It also stipulates that American citizens cannot solicit.
Accept, or agree to accept,
Donations or other items of value received from a foreign national. I suspect we're going to hear the phrase "thing of value" a lot in the coming months, by the way, in part because the courts haven't been super clear at deciding what it means.
If, hypothetically, you received damning information about your opponent from a foreign national, and then shared that information, That is probably receiving a thing of value, but it hasn't been entirely established And there are a lot of nuances here, Have you received a thing of value if you know about the thing, and approve of sharing it but don't share it yourself? Did you solicit a thing of value, if you set up a meeting with a foreign national, In the hope they would provide something they didn't provide et cetera Et cetera So many people in Trump's campaign have past relationships with Putin's regime Trump's one time campaign manager, Paul Manafort, received around $30 million dollars working for Oleg Deripaska, who is seen as one of Putin's closest business confidantes Michael Caputo, an early Trump adviser had previously worked on a Russian campaign to improve Putin's image among Americans Trump's Attorney General, Jeff Sessions had to recuse himself from the Russia investigation after it was revealed he had previously undisclosed meetings with Sergei Kislyak Russia's ambassador to the United States And Michael Flynn, Trump's first national security advisor failed to disclose payments that were made to him by an arm of the Russian government And failure to disclose such payments is illegal for former military officers Flynn also talks several times with Sergei Kislyak during the transition, the period after the election, but before Trump became president.
One of those calls occurred on December the 29th, which happened to be the same day the US announced new sanctions on Russia Flynn initially denied that he discussed sanctions on that call, but it became apparent that there was evidence to the contrary, because Kislyak's calls are routinely monitored by US intelligence. Discussing sanctions policy on that call was possibly illegal, I mean Flynn was not yet the national security advisor, but he was trying to negotiate foreign policy But a greater concern is that the day after Trump learned that had Flynn lied about discussion sanctions, Trump asked FBI director James Comey for "loyalty" And then, the day after Flynn eventually resigned, Trump asked Comey to drop the Flynn investigation altogether. This is concerning because the FBI and Justice Department in the United States are supposed operate independently of the White House. That's part of the reason why FBI directors serve a ten year term, They're supposed to be above party politics and not beholden to one particular leader Trump asking Comey to drop the Flynn investigation was a significant breach of protocol In fact, some have argued that it amounts to that it amounts to obstruction of justice which is the charge that Richard Nixon was eventually impeached for And then a few months later, Trump fired James Comey Initially the White House said the FBI Director was being fired for his mishandling of the Hillary Clinton email case But then, after a few days of trying on trying on various justifications, Trump acknowledged it was mostly about the collusion-with-Russia investigation But if firing Comey was intended to make the investigation end, that gambit definitely failed because a few days later, the Department of Justice appointed a Special Counsel, Robert Mueller He is tasked with building a team to look into collusion and "any matters that arise from the investigation" Since then, Mueller has been doing just that, and it has been reported that he's working with at least two Grand Juries to decide who, if anyone, should be charged with crimes The most serious evidence of collusion that has emerged so far involves a meeting with a Kremlin connected Russian lawyer that was attended by Donald Trump Jr, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner, the President's son in law and Senior Advisor So during the setup for the meeting, Donald Trump Junior was told via email That the lawyer had (quote) "incriminating information about Hillary Clinton" that she wanted to share as (quote) "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr.
Trump". That should've been a HUGE red flag, like the correct response there is: "I cannot accept anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a campaign – – *ESPECIALLY* not if it's part of a foreign government's support for my candidate" But instead Donald Trump Jr replied in part "if it's what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer" The meeting that ensued remains secret for over a year until July of 2017 when the New York Times published a report about it Donald Trump Jr initially said the meeting was about adoption, but then a day later said that The meeting had been about Hillary Clinton, but that the lawyer "Had no meaningful information" Even if that's true, some legal scholars still think the meeting itself was illegal depending on your definition of
"soliciting" and "thing of value" Kushner, meanwhile failed to mention this, and also several other meetings with Russian officials on his initial security clearance application He also apparently asked the Russian government for a so called "back channel" that would've allowed Kushner to communicate directly with Moscow without US intelligence listening in Much of this is suspicious – Trump Jr, Kushner, Manafort and Flynn have all been caught in lies about the extent and nature with their contacts with the Russian government But,  It is not clear that any of these are unambiguous evidences of collusion with foreign nationals. , None of what is known publicly involves the President himself Except for him asking Comey to drop the investigation That said, Trump's behavior to Russia has at times been, strange As President, he had a private meeting with Putin without a US interpreter present which is *extremely* unusual Trump has also gone to great lengths not to criticize Putin and he has refused to publicly acknowledge or condemn the Putin regime's interference in our election.
But none of that is illegal – and connecting the dots can lead to a very misleading picture when you don't have many dots. What we know is that the Russian government sought to influence the US Presidential Election in Trump's favor, That at least one person in Trump's campaign knew about this, and that Several people close to Trump had interactions with Russian foreign nationals that they either failed to disclose, or lied about None of the meetings reported so far involve the President himself, although he did try to interfere with the ensuring investigation So that's what we know, What we don't know, is almost everything. We don't know what was discussed in the meetings, whether any American accepted any thing of value from a foreign national And we certainly don't know if any American participated in collusion with the Russian government's efforts Also we don't even know for sure what a 'thing of value' is I think it's important to follow this story because it has big implications for the present and future of our democracy but I also think it's really important to remember that we are living in the middle of this story and we don't know how it's going to end Now if you're looking for information to confirm your preexisting biases You'll find plenty of that on both sides but the whole truth, we just don't know that yet I hope we will some day.
Hank, I'll see you on Friday..