Trump-Russia Collusion: Law-Breaking Campaign Conspiracy?

The question of whether Donald Trump's presidential campaign broke the law with its connections to Russia has been the subject of intense scrutiny and debate. The issue centres on the campaign's interactions with Russian officials and WikiLeaks, and whether these constituted illegal collusion or coordination under campaign finance laws.

The key piece of evidence is an email exchange between Donald Trump Jr. and a former Russian business partner, in which Trump Jr. was offered negative information on Hillary Clinton from a senior Russian government official. Trump Jr. replied, If it's what you say I love it, and arranged a meeting with the Trump campaign manager and his brother-in-law, who was also advising the campaign. This meeting took place in June 2016, shortly after Trump became the Republican nominee.

Legal experts are divided on whether this exchange and meeting constituted a violation of campaign finance laws, which prohibit soliciting or receiving anything of value from foreign nationals. Some argue that the information offered constitutes a thing of value, while others disagree, claiming that the law refers more to tangible or monetisable benefits.

The Special Counsel investigation, led by Robert Mueller, did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. However, the investigation resulted in many criminal charges and indictments, and the debate over the legality of the Trump campaign's actions continues.

Did Donald Trump Jr. break the law by meeting with Russians to gain dirt on Clinton?

On June 9, 2016, Donald Trump Jr. met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower in New York. Also in attendance were then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, music publicist Rob Goldstone, and a translator.

The meeting was arranged by Goldstone, who acted as an intermediary for his client, Russian pop star Emin Agalarov, and his father, real estate magnate Aras Agalarov. Goldstone stated in an email to Trump Jr. that the lawyer had "very high level and sensitive information" that would incriminate Hillary Clinton and "would be very useful" to Trump's father. Trump Jr. responded, "if it's what you say I love it".

In a statement, Trump Jr. said he released the emails "in order to be totally transparent". He and the then-president called the meeting "standard opposition research" and said no meaningful information came from it.

While Trump and his legal team have insisted there was nothing illegal about the meeting, some have questioned whether Trump Jr. broke the law by soliciting a "thing of value" from a foreign national. Federal campaign finance law states it is illegal for a foreign national to "directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value". However, others have argued that the meeting was not illegal, as it is standard practice in politics to gather information on opponents.

The meeting and the surrounding events are being examined as part of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible connections to the Trump campaign.

Did the Trump campaign-Russia-WikiLeaks connection break campaign finance laws?

The Trump campaign-Russia connection

According to an email shared by Donald Trump Jr., he was approached by one of his father's former Russian business partners with an offer from a senior Russian government official to provide the Trump campaign with negative information on Hillary Clinton. Trump Jr. replied, "If it's what you say I love it," and scheduled the meeting, inviting the Trump campaign manager and his brother-in-law, who was also advising the campaign. The meeting took place in June 2016, just after Donald Trump became the Republican Party's nominee for president.

The law

Federal law makes it a crime for any person to "solicit, accept or receive" a contribution or "anything of value" from a foreign person for a U.S. political campaign or "for the purpose of influencing any election for federal office." The law prohibits foreign nationals from providing "anything of value... in connection with" an election and applies not only to donations or spending of any "thing of value" but also to an "express or implied promise" to supply any such campaign support.

Did the Trump campaign break the law?

Some legal experts argue that the statute includes an "express or implied promise" to give something of value, so it may not matter whether the thing of value was ever actually provided. However, others note that the law has traditionally been applied to money or gifts rather than information or speech, and it is unclear whether opposition research qualifies under the law as something "of value".

The Mueller investigation

Special Counsel Robert Mueller was appointed to lead an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign "conspired or coordinated" with the Russian government in its election interference activities. However, Mueller's report did not address whether the Trump campaign broke campaign finance laws.

While there is no clear consensus on whether the Trump campaign-Russia-WikiLeaks connection broke campaign finance laws, the available evidence suggests that there may have been a violation, particularly given the broad interpretation of the law's prohibition on foreign national involvement in U.S. elections.

Did the Trump campaign collude with Russia?

There is no clear answer as to whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. However, there is evidence of multiple contacts and interactions between members of the Trump campaign and Russian officials, which have raised suspicions about potential collusion or coordination.

In June 2016, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya after being promised information that would incriminate Hillary Clinton. Trump Jr. responded to the offer, saying, "if it's what you say I love it". This meeting is often cited as a potential instance of coordination or collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Additionally, there have been reports of other interactions between Trump campaign members and Russian officials, including:

• Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign, was investigated for his contacts with Russian officials and was the subject of multiple Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants.
• George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser, offered to set up a meeting between the Trump campaign and Russian leadership, which was rejected by campaign advisers.
• Roger Stone, a former adviser to Trump, claimed to have been in contact with Guccifer 2.0, a hacker who claimed responsibility for the DNC hack, and communicated with Wikileaks.
• Erik Prince, a Trump associate, secretly met with a Russian close to Vladimir Putin in the Seychelles to potentially establish a backchannel between Trump and Putin.

While these interactions have raised suspicions, the question of collusion or coordination remains a matter of debate. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government. However, Mueller's report did not exonerate Trump on obstruction of justice charges.

The interpretation of these interactions and their legality is a complex matter that involves campaign finance laws, conspiracy, and coordination. Legal experts have differing opinions on whether the actions of the Trump campaign and its members violated the law.

Did the Trump campaign commit conspiracy to defraud the United States?

In August 2023, former President Donald Trump was indicted by a grand jury in Washington, D.C. on four charges, one of which was conspiracy to defraud the United States. This charge relates to Trump's repeated and widespread efforts to spread false claims about the 2020 election, knowing they were not true, and attempting to illegally discount legitimate votes, all with the goal of overturning the election.

The indictment states that Trump and his co-conspirators allegedly attempted to "oppress, threaten and intimidate" people in their right to vote in an election.

The conspiracy to defraud charge is one of the most serious allegations facing Trump, according to University of Richmond Law Professor Carl Tobias, who noted that the indictment "shows how broad and deep the conspiracy was".

The charge of "conspiracy against rights" dates back to the Civil War era and was passed to stop members of the Ku Klux Klan and similar organisations from intimidating and harassing Black voters.

Trump's indictment also includes charges of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.

Did the Trump campaign commit criminal conspiracy?

In June 2016, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort, met with a Russian national, lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, after being promised information about Hillary Clinton. Trump Jr. was told that the Russian government supported his father and could provide "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia". Trump Jr. replied, "If it's what you say I love it", and scheduled the meeting.

Whether this meeting constituted a criminal conspiracy depends on what was said and done, and what the Trump campaign was trying to accomplish. There is a plausible charge here, but it would depend on a number of issues never resolved by a federal court. Most obviously, was the information he solicited a "thing of value"? Common sense says yes, but the closest precedents in federal bribery laws suggest that while something "intangible" can be a thing of value, it has to have a fairly monetizable value.

"Collusion" is not a criminal law term, but in everyday use, it usually means a secret agreement to cooperate illegally or improperly. A secret agreement to cooperate illegally can itself be illegal: this is the crime of conspiracy. If two people agree to commit a crime and then one or more of them does anything to carry out the agreement, they've committed conspiracy.

In this case, if the Trump campaign agreed to receive illegal campaign assistance from a foreign national and then took steps to carry out the agreement, they've committed conspiracy. However, it's important to note that Mueller's investigation "did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities".

Frequently asked questions