No evidence Trump ‘conspired’ with Russia
Mueller draws no conclusion on claims of obstruction; AG says none occurred
WASHINGTON — Special counsel Robert Mueller did not find that Donald Trump or his campaign schemed with Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, according to a summary released Sunday.
The president immediately embraced as a “complete exoneration” even though Mueller reached no conclusion about whether the president obstructed justice.
After a nearly two-year investigation, Mueller’s findings seemed to dispel the cloud of conspiracy that has hung over the administration since its inception. More coverage, Page A4
But by delivering caveats alongside conclusions, the closing of the Mueller investigation opens the door to fiercer political fights over the president’s judgment and power.
The four-page summary issued Sunday by Attorney General William Barr declared: “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.”
The letter notes that Mueller’s probe said no such conspiracy was found “despite multiple offers from Russia-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”
Barr said he and Justice Department officials separately determined that there was insufficient evidence to make an obstruction accusation against the president — although Mueller was not definitive on that point.
Trump spoke to reporters at a Florida airport Sunday afternoon, declaring that the dark cloud of suspicion that had hung over his administration since its inception had finally lifted.
“After a long look, after a long investigation, after so many people have been so badly hurt, after not looking at the other side, where a lot of bad things happened, a lot of horrible things happened for our country, it was just announced there was no collusion with Russia,” the president said, declaring the findings “a complete and total exoneration.”
“It’s a shame that our country had to go through this; to be honest it’s a shame that your president has had to go through this,” Trump said, urging that Democrats be investigated.
On the question of whether the president might have sought to obstruct the high-profile investigation, Mueller’s team did not offer a definitive answer.
“The Special Counsel . . . did not draw a conclusion — one way or the other— as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction,” Barr’s letter to lawmakers states.
“The Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him’,” the letter says, signaling that Mueller’s team apparently struggled with the issue.
“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 letter says.
Mueller’s decision to forgo a conclusion as to whether the president tried to obstruct justice struck a discordant note with current and former law-enforcement officials, who noted that it was one of the primary reasons for appointing a special counsel.
“I think courageous people have the courage to make decisions, and those who don’t punt decisions,” said George Terwilliger, a former deputy attorney general who worked in the George H.W. Bush administration with Mueller and Barr.
Since his appointment in May 2017 as special counsel, Mueller has wrestled with the question of whether the president attempted to obstruct justice once the FBI began investigating those close to him. Current and former White House officials who were questioned by Mueller’s investigators were repeatedly asked about how the president spoke of the investigation behind closed doors, and whether he sought to replace senior Justice Department officials to stymie the probe, according to people familiar with the interviews.
Mueller “ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment” on the question of obstruction, Barr wrote, so the attorney general and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein decided.
Rosenstein and Barr “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,” Barr wrote.
Barr’s letter does not make clear whether Mueller asked Barr and Rosenstein to make a final determination on the question of obstruction.
A spokesman for Mueller declined to comment.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a series of tweets he wants Barr to quickly testify before Congress to explain what the lawmaker called “very concerning discrepancies and final decision-making at the Justice Department following the Special Counsel report.”
Trump’s lawyers seized on part of the letter that said Mueller recognized “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference.” That is not necessary to charge the crime of obstruction, Barr noted, but he added that “the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction.”
It was unclear whether the White House will get to review Mueller’s full report. Justice Department officials have been silent on that question, although Barr’s letter strongly suggests that he intends to release a redacted version.
Barr said the Mueller report appears to contain grand jury material that is barred by law from being released. He said he will work with Mueller to identify such material, and any information whose public release might compromise ongoing investigations.
The attorney general said his “goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel’s report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Department policies.”
Barr’s letter said that the special counsel’s office employed 19 lawyers and was assisted by about 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants and other personnel. About 500 witnesses were interviewed, and 13 foreign governments were asked to turn over evidence.
Overall, the special counsel’s office issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants and obtained more than 230 orders for communications records.