Russia Investigation Takes New Turn

Kevin Conlon, Contributor


                                                                                                                        Ever since taking office in January of last year, President Trump’s surprise victory over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election has been overshadowed by rumors that a key factor in his election was secret and possibly illegal intervention on the behalf of his government by the Russian government. Although President Trump and many of his supporters have vehemently denied that any wrongdoing took place, numerous intelligence agencies have reported that Russians did attempt to sway the outcome of the election by deliberately pushing false news stories on social media forums like Facebook.

Further, recent revelations have revealed that it is likely the President attempted to have a meeting with Russian officials through his son before the election in order to gain damaging information about his opponent. This fact, combined with the recent revelations that former Trump advisors like General Michael Flynn and campaign manager Paul Manafort were charged with lying to the FBI, makes it important that this deeply important issue be addressed with as little political bias as possible. Although removing bias is, of course, impossible in the heart of our government, Washington D.C., it is possible to stay informed about this matter, and make sure the strongly held beliefs of the American people, on all sides, are heard by our government.

The scope of the allegations against the Trump administration and the President in particular has included that he willingly and illegally collaborated with the Russian government in order to get compromising information on his opponent, and was complicit in allowing another country to hack our election systems. One of the main occurrences that led to these accusations was the meeting Donald Trump Jr. had several months before the election with a Putin-connected Russian lawyer at Trump Tower, who had promised him with information that could help Trump win the election. The decision to have this meeting was, in my opinion, a very poor decision not only because of the authoritarian, human-rights ignoring government that the Russian lawyer serves in but also because it creates an impression that America’s leaders aren’t being forthcoming about behind-the-scenes policy makers.

But while this connection was ill-advised, I don’t believe it can be considered collusion or “treasonous” activity, especially at a point where we know very little about the conversation that took place, and there is no evidence that any information that may have been transmitted was acted upon by the Trump campaign. Furthermore, collusion with a foreign power is defined by the US government in Article III of the US Constitution as an American who gives aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States during a time of war, or who wages war on the government directly. Therefore, while President Trump and some of his associates may be found to have engaged in other questionable activity, I believe that it is premature to label the actions of the President as collusion at this date.

Other associates of the Trump campaign, including former National Security Adviser Flynn and Former Campaign Manager Manafort, do certainly seem to have engaged in behavior that threatens the security of the United States. Both were shown to have lied to the FBI about business dealings they had with the Russian government, and while it is yet to be seen whether or not those dealings were illegal, their refusal mention them freely to law enforcement very likely shows they have deeper involvements than previously expected.

Due to the constant developments occurring in this investigation and the widespread damaging effects it could have on our government institutions, it is imperative that this investigation should continue. Despite partisan attacks, the lead investigator, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has been well noted by Republicans and Democrats for his military service and history of political impartiality. Although reports have recently have come to light about some members of his team possibly having anti-Trump bias in the forms of texts and emails sent to reporters and friends, I think the best course of action for the time being is to allow this investigation to continue uninterfered. Hopefully as time goes on, more light will be shed on the truth of what really happened during this past election.