A Brief Summary of Volume I of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Report, Part 2:
Volume I of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report found “that members of the Trump Campaign [had not] conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities” (1. Volume I, Page 2) and specifically, “the evidence was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election” (1. Volume I, Page 9).
The investigation looked into and “uncovered evidence of numerous links (i.e., contacts) between Trump Campaign officials and individuals having or claiming to have ties to the Russian government” (1. Volume I, Page 180). One link which the investigation looked into was “the interactions between the Trump Campaign and Russian-affiliated individuals [surrounding] the June 9, 2016 meeting between high-ranking campaign officials and Russians promising derogatory information on Hillary Clinton” (1. Volume I, Page 180). “On June 3, 2016… Donald Trump Jr., [received in email] an “offer” from Russia’s “Crown prosecutor” to “the Trump campaign” of “official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to [Trump Jr. ‘s] father.” The email described this as “very high level and sensitive information” that is “part of Russia and its government’s support to Mr. Trump”” (1. Volume I, Page 185). “Trump Jr. responded: “if it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer”” (1. Volume I, Page 185). Donald Trump Jr. then “had follow-up conversations and, within days, scheduled a meeting with Russian representatives that was attended by Trump Jr., [Paul] Manafort, and [Jared] Kushner. The communications setting up the meeting and the attendance by high-level Campaign representatives support an inference that the Campaign anticipated receiving derogatory documents and information from official Russian sources that could assist candidate Trump’s electoral prospects” (1. Volume I, Page 185). Although this reception of information could be constituted as “involving the solicitation or receipt of assistance from foreign sources” relating to campaign finance law, Special Counsel Robert Mueller… did not find “commission of… campaign-finance offenses,” and that the Special Counsel’s “evidence was not sufficient to obtain and sustain a criminal conviction” of members of the Trump Campaign” (1. Volume I, Page 174).
The report did end up “charging certain individuals connected to the Campaign with making false statements or otherwise obstructing the investigation or parallel congressional investigations” (1. Volume I, Page 174). So, although “contacts between Campaign officials and Russia affiliated individuals may not have been sufficient to establish or sustain criminal charges, several U.S. persons connected to the Campaign made false statements about those contacts and took other steps to obstruct the Office’s investigation and those of Congress” (1. Volume I, Page 180). “On October 7, 2017, Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to charges” (see United States v. George Papadopoulos), and “pursuant to a plea agreement, on September 7, 2018, he was sentenced to 14 days of imprisonment, a $9,500 fine, and 200 hours of community service” (1. Volume I, Page 194). “On December 1, 2017, and pursuant to a plea agreement, Flynn pleaded guilty to charges and also admitted his false statements to the Department” (see United States v. Michael T Flynn); Flynn is awaiting sentencing (1. Volume I, Page 195). “On November 29, 2018, [Michael] Cohen pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to a single-count information charging him with making false statements in a matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch”, and “[o]n December 12, 2018, the judge sentenced Cohen to two months of imprisonment on the false-statements count, to run concurrently with a 36-month sentence imposed on the other counts (1. Volume I, Page 196).
Additionally, ”[t]he investigation uncovered extensive evidence that Paul Manafort’s and Richard Gates’s pre-campaign work for the government of Ukraine violated [The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA)]”, which “makes it illegal to act as an agent of a foreign principal by engaging in certain (largely political) activities in the United States without registering with the Attorney General” (1. Volume I, Page 182). “The investigation did not, however, yield evidence sufficient to sustain any charge that [Manafort, Gates, or] any individual affiliated with the Trump Campaign acted as an agent of a foreign principal within the meaning of FARA [under] the direction or control of the government of Russia, or any official thereof” (1. Volume I, Page 183).