The Russia investigation may soon be coming to a head. Here are three things to keep in mind.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in our election and team Trump’s possible involvement has been moving along for a little over a year now. On a seemingly daily basis, we’ve been exposed to new developments, often-complex plot points, and sometimes-tangential sub-stories. It’s easy to feel so overwhelmed by all of this that tuning out altogether feels like the easiest course of action.
But we cannot afford to do that — not on this story. So, for a quick recap of why this investigation is so important: a hostile foreign power (Russia) committed an act of political warfare by intervening in our election in an effort to tip the scales toward one candidate — Donald Trump; Trump and/or his campaign may have conspired with them to do it; Trump may have abused his power to try and stymie the investigation; and Trump — who benefited from this interference — and his congressional allies have done nothing to ensure Russia doesn’t attack us again in future elections.
Beyond the clearly troubling position we would find ourselves in if it turns out the president of the United States or his allies sought out help from a foreign government to help win an election, free and fair elections are the cornerstone of a healthy and vibrant democracy. If we cannot ensure them, we’re in trouble.
Why does all of this matter right now? The Trump team is growing increasingly impatient with Mueller’s probe, and there are numerous signs that the president may try to shut it down on his own and even use his powers to nullify any potential legal actions taken by Mueller against the Trump or his allies.
As the likelihood of a clash between the two camps grows — one that will almost certainly spark conversations on such topics as limits of presidential power and the rule of law — here are three important pieces of information about Mueller’s investigation to keep in mind.
The probe has already uncovered crimes related to the election.
Mueller has secured five guilty pleas and 17 indictments, including against Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort. According to FiveThirtyEight, Mueller has produced one of the most efficient special-counsel investigations of the past 40 years. And he’s moved on these matters in a fraction of the time that previous investigations have taken:
Our analysis of special counsel probes in the modern era, starting in 19791 shows that the fact that Mueller’s investigation has produced criminal charges at all sets it apart — a majority of the investigations over the past four decades ended without charges being filed against anyone. Moreover, in the inquiries that produced criminal charges, the first occurred more than a year, on average, after the special prosecutor was appointed — while Mueller’s investigation produced its first charges after less than five months.
Historically, major special counsel investigations that have led to charges have lasted for years, with indictments trickling out as an inquiry gains momentum.
The Trump team is desperately trying to discredit the investigation.
Regardless of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Mueller probe — and despite the president’s supposed innocence — Trump, his allies, and many congressional Republicans are continuing to attack it anyway. Why? It’s simple: to make the investigation look partisan — to make it appear as though Trump (and the elected Republicans enabling him) are on one side, and anyone opposing them is therefore on the “other side.”
Mueller’s approval rating — which last year was above water among even Republicans — has actually slid as Trump has escalated his attacks, because doing so has moved the investigation from an independent playing field onto a partisan one; thus, people’s reactions to it are beginning to fall more along typical partisan lines.
And that, at the end of the day, is a win for Trump. It allows him to point to any negative result that might come at the conclusion of this investigation and say, “Well, it’s just a bunch of politics, so who are you going to believe?” as he’ll have already primed Americans to see it that way.
Trump’s legal team is preparing a defense that may spark a constitutional crisis.
This week offered the strongest evidence yet that Trump will try to thwart the institutional restraints on his presidential power in an effort to save himself and his allies should the worst come to pass. A new report from the New York Times reveals that Trump’s lawyers are preparing to use the same defense as none other than Richard Nixon — namely, that obstruction of justice is legal if you’re the president. Per the Times:
In a brash assertion of presidential power, the 20-page letter — sent to the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and obtained by The New York Times — contends that the president cannot illegally obstruct any aspect of the investigation into Russia’s election meddling because the Constitution empowers him to, “if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon.”
Jonathan Chait writes of the memo:
The implications of this authority are breathtaking. Trump, in their view, has unlimited control to open or close any federal investigation. […] Trump cannot obstruct justice, according to his official legal stance, because justice is whatever Trump says it is. Before this is over, either Trump’s sweeping claim will survive, or the rule of law will, but not both.
Trump has also recently discovered his ability to issue presidential pardons, which would allow him to overrule a sentence handed down through the U.S. legal system against a defendant if he sees fit. (To be clear, this is a power that has been used by all but two presidents). According to FiveThirtyEight, “The vast majority of pardons are given to people far from the public spotlight who have served all or most of their sentences.” Which is what makes Trump’s pardoning of political figures so unique and concerning.
Moreover, Rudy Giuliani, acting as a legal adviser to Trump, has argued that the president has the power to pardon himself, should the need arise.
What has perturbed many legal observers about Trump’s pardoning spree is the message it might send to his allies embroiled in the Russia investigation — such as Flynn and Manafort — that if they are loyal to him, he’ll return the favor.
Update – June 4, 9:19 a.m.
It’s as though the president wanted to help bolster my points this morning:
