The Evidence Against the President
Back in August, the corruption case against President Trump began to take shape. In King of the Swamp, I outlined the evidence against the President on three criminal acts:
Violating election laws: the law prohibits foreign nationals from contributing any “thing of value” (which includes “dirt” on an opponent), to an election campaign (Politico)
Campaign financing fraud: to protect his election bid, paying off the women he had affairs with to remain silent (USA Today)
Obstructing justice: covering up his crimes and bullying the investigators and witnesses
Both the list of crimes and the evidence against President Trump have grown since August. Information on these wrong doings has come out in bits and pieces over time. This makes it hard to have a clear picture of where the evidence currently stands. First, let’s review the evidence against the President regarding the initial three crimes outlined above.
The Evidence on Colluding with Foreigners
Ultimately, the Mueller investigation will determine the strength of the evidence on collusion. Presently, it is clear that Russian agents approached at least 14 Trump’s associates during the campaign and transition. These included his children, his lawyer, his national-security adviser, and business associates. From the Mueller investigation, we have a snippet that suggests campaign adviser Roger Stone and right-wing author Jerome Corsi communicated about contacting Julian Assange in July 2016 (the Guardian) regarding the Clinton emails. But subsequent denials and Corsi’s filing a suit against Mueller saying he was unfairly targeted have clouded the evidence picture. Although the evidence suggests numerous associates had contact with the Russians (and no one thought to report it), the exact nature of the contact and the President’s role remain unknown.
The Evidence on Hush Money Payoffs
In contrast, it is clear the President paid hush money to several women to keep quiet about his extramarital affairs. Trump directed his lawyer to pay hush money in violation of election laws. His current claim that he never directed his lawyer, Micheal Cohen, to break the law is preposterous. There is a tape.
Cohen has said, under oath, that the President directed him to violate the federal elections laws. Specifically, Cohen has pleaded guilty to violating the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). The law limits donations by individuals to $2,700 per election. It also prohibits corporations from contributing directly to a campaign. Because Cohen admitted that the payments were intended to protect Trump’s election chances, they become in-kind contributions to the Trump campaign (USA Today) .
Shortly before the election in 2016, Cohen arranged paying $150,000 to former Playboy model Karen McDougal, and $130,000 to adult film star Stormy Daniels. Furthermore, Cohen taped the discussion with Trump regarding these payments (NY Times). The tape shows the President was fully aware of the payoffs. The amounts of the payments exceed the contribution limits. Additionally, American Media Inc., the corporate parent of the National Enquirer, provided the money to pay McDougal, a violation of the restrictions on contributions from corporations. A final violation is the campaign did not include the payments, as required, in their finance reports.
The Evidence of a Cover Up
The independent Brooking Institute has basically concluded that President Trump has obstructed justice. They laid out the evidence in a comprehensive report in 2017. In their August 2018 update of this report (Brookings), they make stronger conclusions regarding the President obstructing justice. They write “it has become apparent that the president’s pattern of potentially obstructive conduct is much more extensive than we knew. To take only a few examples, it has since been reported that President Trump: attempted to block Attorney General Sessions’ recusing himself from the Russia investigation despite the AG’s clear legal duty to do so; asked Sessions to reverse his recusal decision; demanded and obtained the resignation of Sessions for his failure to contain the Russia investigation (before ultimately rejecting it); twice ordered the firing of Special Counsel Robert Mueller; dictated a false account for a key witness, his son Donald Trump Jr., of the June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting between campaign and Russian representatives; publicly attacked Special Counsel Mueller and key witnesses to the obstruction case; and has repeatedly disputed the underlying Russian attack and Vladimir Putin’s role in it despite possessing evidence to the contrary. “
Other Investigations
Beyond the three potential crimes discussed above, prosecutors are investigating the Trump administration and businesses on a number of other fronts. Major investigations include: illegal foreign donations to the Trump Inaugural Committee and Super PACs, agreements to overpay Trump businesses for their role in the Presidents Inauguration, and improper coordination between the Trump Foundation charity and his campaign. I summarize each below.
Illegal Foreign Donations to Trump’s Inaugural Committees and Super PACs: Federal prosecutors are investigating if foreigners illegally funneled donations to President Trump’s Inaugural Committee and a pro-Trump Super PAC in hopes of buying influence over American policy (NY Times). In particular, they are looking at money flowing from mid-eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia.
Improper Payments to Trump Businesses by the Inaugural Committee. Federal prosecutors in New York are investigating Trump’s 2017 inaugural committee and Ivanka Trump for potential financial wrongdoing regarding the price negotiations for space rental in the Trump International Hotel in D.C. (Rolling Stone). President Trump’s inaugural committee paid large sums of money to the Trump organization to host events at the Trump-owned property.
Unlawful Coordination Between the Trump Foundation (which claims Charity status) and the Campaign. The state of New York filed a suit against the foundation, Trump, and his children Eric, Donald Jr. and Ivanka Trump. It alleges that they violated federal and state charities law with a “persistent” pattern of conduct that included unlawful coordination with the 2016 Trump presidential campaign.(CNN) .
What Do We Do Now?
The evidence against the President is quickly growing. We have passed into a realm in which it is clear he has broken the law several times. So, where do we go from here?
The media has facilitated debate on whether a sitting President can be indicted and what is an impeachable offense. The answers to both these questions are somewhat ambiguous. Ultimately, it is a political question. At what point is the cumulative corruption a political liability for the Republican party, causing them to abandon him?