The New York Times’s report that the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation into whether President Donald Trump was acting as a Russian agent raises the prospect that the president may be a clear and present danger to US national security. It wasn’t just the FBI investigating—both the House and Senate intelligence committees opened investigations into Trump’s ties to Russia. But over the past two years, instead of trying to protect our national security, Republicans in Congress worked hard to undermine US law enforcement and protect Trump at all costs. They have been derelict in upholding their duty to protect the Constitution and the country from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Rudy Giuliani is back on his goalpost-moving game, backtracking on two years of denials that there was “no collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia. And he is right to backtrack—it has been obvious for a long time that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.
Oleg Deripaska, a Russian billionaire aluminum magnate and Kremlin insider, has a business relationship with Paul Manafort that dates back more than a decade.
As a result of an improperly redacted court filing this week by former Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort’s lawyers, new details emerged revealing that the Trump campaign shared private polling data with individuals linked to Russian intelligence during the 2016 election, bringing the current count of contacts between Trump campaign and transition officials and Russia-linked figures above 100 for the first time.
As the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election continues to close in on President Donald Trump and his closest advisors, there have been reinvigorated concerns that he will attempt to use his pardon power to undermine the investigation. While concerns about the lengths to which Trump will go to protect himself and his inner circle from accountability are well-founded, there are important limits to the pardon power. The president’s pardon power cannot be used to: (1) pardon state crimes, (2) remove federal civil liability, (3) pardon impeachment, or (4) pardon crimes that have not already occurred.
With so much Russia-related news breaking every day, it can be hard to remember how much we’ve learned about Trump’s collusion with the Kremlin in just the past year. We’ve put together a list of 10 of the biggest developments in the Russia investigation in 2018.
Washington, D.C. — Anonymous bank accounts, shell corporations, and front companies are all tools that foreign adversaries can use to execute anonymous financial transactions that facilitate attacks on free and fair democratic elections. A new report today from the Center for American Progress reveals how corporate opacity and Donald Trump’s business interests converged to forge channels that could have allowed the Russian government to provide material support to Trump’s campaign.
Following the Money: Trump and Russia-Linked Transactions From the Campaign to the Presidential Inauguration
At the turn of the 18th century, a newly elected president of the United States—only the second in the nation’s then-brief history—cautioned the American people about “the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections.” In particular, John Adams pointed to threats from abroad, warning that if a changed election outcome “can be obtained by foreign nations by flattery or menaces, by fraud or violence, by terror, intrigue, or venality, the Government may not be the choice of the American people, but of foreign nations. It may be foreign nations who govern us, and not we, the people, who govern ourselves.” Speaking before a joint session of Congress, he thus pleaded with the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives to “[preserve] our Constitution from its natural enemies,” including “the profligacy of corruption, and the pestilence of foreign influence, which is the angel of destruction to elective governments.” The threat of foreign influence over our elections did not wane in the intervening 220 years: Today, the United States has a president whose election was aided by the fraud and intrigue of a foreign nation. Americans who watched how President Donald Trump, in the words of the late Sen. John McCain, “abased himself … abjectly before a tyrant” in Helsinki, cannot be faulted for wondering whether John Adams’s long-ago warning has become a reality. Trump’s campaign to win the presidency required money, as did the Kremlin’s campaign to help him. While these two campaigns aligned in their goal—Trump’s victory—overt monetary contributions from Russia would have drawn regulatory scrutiny, not to mention public ire. Any financial support from abroad, therefore, would have had to be creatively obscured.