The full letter of the investigation into the Russian conspiracy that the prosecutor William Barr sent to the US Congress

Sunday, they were presented, by means of a letter of only four pages, the findings of the investigation conducted for 22 months by the prosecutor Robert Mueller on the alleged collusion of interests between the campaign of the then candidate, Donald Trump and Russia.

The letter, prepared by Attorney General William Barr, states that there was no such collusion, at least deliberately.

Here is the complete letter received Sunday by US lawmakers:

Dear President Graham, President Nadler, member of the Feinstein minority and member of the Collins minority:

In addition to the notification of Friday, March 22, 2019, I am writing today to inform you of the key findings of the Special Prosecutor, Robert Mueller, and my early reflections on the report he has prepared.

The report of the special prosecutor

On Friday, the Special Prosecutor sent me a "confidential report explaining the prosecution or refusal decisions" to which he arrived, as requested by the 28th Congress. This report was titled "Report of Investigation into the Interference of Russia in the 2016 Presidential Election". Although my review is still ongoing, I think it is in the general interest to describe the report and summarize the key findings of the Special Prosecutor and the results of his investigation.

The report explains that the Attorney General and his team conducted a thorough investigation into allegations that members of Donald J. Trump's campaign team and other collaborators allegedly conspired with the Russian government in the purpose of ingesting in the 2016 presidential election, or attempts to obstruct the related federal inquiry. In his report, the special prosecutor pointed out that, to carry out his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers badisted by a team of about 40 FBI agents, security badysts, forensic scientists and other professionals. Special Prosecutor issued more than 2,800 citations, executed approximately 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 communications orders, issued nearly 50 orders authorizing engravers with marked numbers, made 13 requests for evidence to foreign governments, and questioned about 500 witnesses

The special prosecutor obtained a series of charges and convictions from individuals and entities related to his investigation, all of which were made public. During his investigation, the special prosecutor also referred several cases to other offices for further action. The report does not recommend any additional charges, and the special prosecutor has not obtained any sealed charges that have not yet been made public. Next, I summarize the main findings of the Special Prosecutor's Report.

Russia's interference in the 2016 US presidential election. The special prosecutor's report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the investigation of the special prosecutor on the interference of Russia in the 2016 presidential election in the United States. The report summarizes Russia's efforts to influence choice and documents crimes committed by people badociated with the Russian government in relation to these efforts. The report further explains that the Special Prosecutor's investigation was primarily aimed at determining whether an American – including people badociated with the Trump campaign – had joined Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would constitute a federal crime. The investigation by the special prosecutor did not conclude that Trump's campaign or anyone related to it had plotted or coordinated Russia's efforts to influence the government. US Presidential Election of 2016. As the report indicates: "(The survey) did not establish that the members of the Trump campaign conspired or consulted with the Russian government in their activities to interfere in elections. "

The Special Prosecutor's investigation found that Russia's two main efforts to influence the 2016 elections were as follows: the first was an attempt by a Russian organization, Internet Research Agency (IRA) ), to carry out misinformation and social media operations in the United States, intended to sow social discord and to interfere in the elections. As noted above, the Special Prosecutor found no United States people or Trump campaigners conspiring or knowingly coordinating with the IRA in these efforts, although the Special Prosecutor engaged criminal proceedings against several citizens and Russian entities in connection with these activities.

The second element concerned the Russian government's efforts to conduct hacking operations to collect and disseminate information to influence the elections. The special prosecutor discovered that Russian government actors had managed to hack computers and obtain emails from people affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic party organizations, and to disseminate them publicly through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. . On the basis of these activities, the Special Prosecutor initiated criminal proceedings against several Russian army officers for conspiracy to hack computers in the United States with the aim of influencing the elections. But as stated above, the special prosecutor has not found that the Trump campaign, nor any of its badociated persons, has plotted or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite the multiple offers of individuals related to Russia to collaborate. with the Trump campaign.

Obstruction of justice The second part of the report deals with a series of actions of the president, most of which were the subject of public reports, on which the special prosecutor investigated as a potential hindrance to Justice. After "conducting an objective and comprehensive investigation" on these issues, the Special Prosecutor asked whether it was appropriate to badess the conduct in accordance with departmental standards that govern the prosecution and dismissal decisions. but finally decided not to make a traditional court decision. As a result, the special prosecutor was unable to determine – in any way – whether or not the behavior under consideration constituted an impediment. On the other hand, for each of the relevant acts investigated, the report presents two-way evidence and leaves unresolved what the Special Council considers to be "difficult questions" of law and facts. relating to the fact that the acts and intent of the president could be considered an obstruction. The special prosecutor claims that "although this report does not conclude that the president has committed a crime, he does not exonerate him either".

The decision of the special prosecutor to describe the facts of his obstruction inquiry without reaching a legal conclusion leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime or not. During the investigation, the Special Prosecutor's Office participated in discussions with some department officials regarding many issues and legal facts related to the Special Prosecutor's investigation into the obstruction. Having considered the final report of the Special Prosecutor on these matters; to consult officials of the Department, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and by applying the principles of the federal prosecutor's office that guide our imputation decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have come to the conclusion that the evidence produced during the investigation of the Special advocate was not enough to establish whether the president had committed an act of obstruction. of Justice. Our decision was made without taking into account – and not relying on – the constitutional considerations surrounding the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

In taking this decision, we note that the special prosecutor acknowledged that "the evidence does not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime related to Russia's interference in the country. "election" and that, although this is not determinative, the absence of such evidence is related. with the intention of the President regarding the obstruction. In general, in order to obtain and maintain a conviction for obstructing work, the government would have to prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that a person, acting with intent to corrupt, participated in obstructive conduct (of justice ) having a sufficient link with a (legal) procedure under way or under examination. When listing the actions of the President, many of which took place during the public hearing, the report does not identify actions that, in our view, constitute obstructive (judicial) behavior, have a link with an ongoing proceeding or were recital and behaving with corrupt intentions, each of them, according to the principles of the federal prosecution that guide the decision to lay charges, should be proven beyond all reasonable doubt to establish a crime of obstruction of justice.

Department Review Status

The relevant regulations provide that the prosecutor's special report will be a "confidential report" for the Attorney General. See Special Prosecutor's Office, 64 Fed., Reg. 37.038, 37.040-41 (July 9, 1999). However, as I said earlier, I am aware of the public interest in this matter. For this reason, my purpose and intention is to disclose most of the special prosecutor's report that I can in accordance with the laws, regulations and policies of the department.

From my conversations with the Special Prosecutor and my initial review, it is clear that the report contains elements that are or could be subject to the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6 (e), which imposes restrictions on Use and disclosure of information. related to "questions [s] occurring before [un] Grand jury. "R. Crim P. 6 (e) (2) (B) Rule 6 (e) generally limits the disclosure of certain information of the grand jury in an investigation and prosecution. elements beyond the strict limits established by the rule constitute a crime in certain circumstances, see, for example, 18 USC 401 (3) .401 (3) This restriction protects the integrity of proceedings before a grand jury. and ensure that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for the exercise of its criminal justice function.

Given these limitations, the timeliness of the report depends in part on the timeliness with which the department can identify document 6 (e) which, by law, can not be made public. I asked the help of the special prosecutor to identify the information 6 (e) contained in the report as soon as possible. In addition, I must also identify any information that may affect other ongoing issues, including those that the Special Prosecutor has referred to other offices. As soon as this process is completed, I will be able to proceed quickly to determine what can be published in light of the laws, regulations and policies of the department.

As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Prosecutor 's Rule states that "the Attorney General may decide to publicly disclose" notifications to their respective committees if they are in the public interest ". CFR 600.9 (c) .I have decided, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering them.