Five key takeaways from the Russian indictments

New indictments of 13 Russians who allegedly meddled in the 2016 election set the political world abuzz on Friday. 

The charges were first posted on the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) website but were fleshed out by Deputy Attorney General Rod RosensteinRod Jay RosensteinEx-Trump aide: Can’t imagine Mueller not giving House a ‘roadmap’ to impeachment Rosenstein: My time at DOJ is 'coming to an end' Five takeaways from McCabe’s allegations against Trump MORE at a hastily convened news conference.

What are the key political ramifications from the new charges?

Fire and fury from Trump?

President TrumpDonald John TrumpSchiff urges GOP colleagues to share private concerns about Trump publicly US-China trade talks draw criticism for lack of women in pictures Overnight Defense: Trump to leave 200 troops in Syria | Trump, Kim plan one-on-one meeting | Pentagon asks DHS to justify moving funds for border wall MORE is hypersensitive to any suggestion that his victory over Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonHillicon Valley: Trump pushes to speed up 5G rollout | Judge hits Roger Stone with full gag order | Google ends forced arbitration | Advertisers leave YouTube after report on pedophile ring 4 ways Hillary looms over the 2020 race Hillary Clinton met with Biden, Klobuchar to talk 2020: report MORE in 2016 was illegitimate. These new indictments are sure to get under his skin for precisely that reason.

ADVERTISEMENT

The indictments lay out in granular detail the nature of the alleged Russian effort to aid Trump. According to prosecutors, that effort involved significant manpower and money. There were more than 80 employees assigned to one part of the project by July 2016, according to court documents, and a broader effort codenamed "Project Lakhta" was being bankrolled at a rate of $1.25 million per month as of September 2016.

The court documents note that the overall objective was to “sow discord in the U.S. political system.” But, they add, “Defendants’ operations included supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaging Hillary Clinton.”

Whatever the legal ramifications, this is a significant political problem for Trump. By its very nature, it casts a cloud over his win.

Democrats seized on that issue, including House Minority Leader Nancy PelosiNancy Patricia D'Alesandro PelosiOn The Money: Senate Dems to introduce resolution blocking Trump emergency declaration | Banks made billion in extra profits thanks to GOP tax law | IRS analyst charged with leaking Cohen's financial records Coast Guard lieutenant accused of planning domestic terrorism denied bail Inviting Kim Jong Un to Washington MORE (D-Calif.).

“As desperately as President Trump insists that the special counsel investigation is a ‘hoax,’ ” Pelosi said, “these latest indictments build on multiple guilty pleas and indictments of several Trump campaign officials, demonstrating the gravity of the Trump-Russia scandal.”

The president began tweeting about the matter within hours of the indictment, noting that prosecutors say the Russian effort began in 2014, before his presidential campaign began. 

“No collusion!” he also insisted — a message reiterated by a written statement from White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

But with the indictments dominating political news, expect more explosive Trump comments, soon.

No proof — here — of collusion

Rosenstein emphasized during his news conference that none of the information amounted to a smoking gun proving allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election,” he said

These are important points, and should serve to put a brake on some of the wilder speculation about what the indictments mean. 

However, Rosenstein’s words are not the sweeping exonerations that Trump and his allies suggest either. 

Clearly, Friday’s indictments are part of a much broader picture of Russia-related activities under investigation.

That picture includes the hacking of the Democratic National Committee; the hacking of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails; a June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower which Donald Trump Jr.Donald (Don) John TrumpAnother New York condo votes to remove 'Trump' from name Trump's son attacks LGBT magazine op-ed that calls effort to decriminalize homosexuality 'racist' Gillibrand uses Trump Jr. tweet to fundraise MORE had been led to believe would deliver dirt on Clinton; and the guilty pleas of Michael Flynn, the president’s former national security adviser, and George PapadopoulosGeorge Demetrios PapadopoulosWhite House braces for Mueller report Justice Department preparing for Mueller report as soon as next week: reports Mueller probe figures use fame to pay bills MORE, a former campaign adviser.  

Also, the fact that an allegation is not made in one set of indictments self-evidently does not preclude it from being made in others in the future.

A detailed picture

The specifics offered by the indictments are themselves fascinating. 

If the allegations are true, Russians sought to thwart the candidacies of Trump’s Republican rivals such as Sens. Ted CruzRafael (Ted) Edward CruzInviting Kim Jong Un to Washington Trump endorses Cornyn for reelection as O'Rourke mulls challenge O’Rourke not ruling out being vice presidential candidate MORE (Texas) and Marco RubioMarco Antonio RubioInviting Kim Jong Un to Washington Venezuela closes border with Brazil The Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump escalates fight with NY Times MORE (Fla.). 

They sought to suppress support among black voters for Hillary Clinton, creating fake accounts on social platforms including Facebook and Instagram with names like “Blacktivist” and “Woke Blacks” — and suggesting that she was not strong enough on issues germane to African-Americans. 

They alleged that Clinton had engaged in voter fraud during the Iowa caucuses.

They also promoted rallies — including, apparently, one for Clinton with the working title “Support Hillary. Save American Muslims” — that seem to have been aimed at stoking discord.

Even details that have no direct political import make the indictments read like a spy thriller. 

In a September 2017 email, an alleged Russian conspirator writes to a family member: “We had a slight crisis here at work: the FBI busted our activity (not a joke). So, I got preoccupied with covering tracks together with the colleagues.”

Rosenstein makes his stand  

Rosenstein has been buffeted by frequent news reports that Trump is frustrated with him, and might consider seeking his ouster. He faced additional criticism following the publication of a memo written by staff of Rep. Devin NunesDevin Gerald NunesThe Hill's 12:30 Report — Presented by Kidney Care Partners — Lawmakers scramble as shutdown deadline nears ‘Fox & Friends’ host asks if McCabe opening FBI probe into Trump was attempt to ‘overthrow government’ Nunes says GOP lawmakers looking through Russia transcripts, will make DOJ referrals MORE (R-Calif.) earlier this month.

The deputy attorney general’s decision to hold a news conference to announce the indictments was not especially out of the ordinary. But, in the current context, it had the effect of tying him more closely to Mueller and to the probe.

Rosenstein is clearly trying to walk a line. His emphasis that the Friday indictments contained neither proof of collusion nor proof that Russia’s effects affected the election’s outcome might help to placate Trump to some degree.

Still, this was a symbolic show of independence amid a partisan storm.

The Nunes memo didn’t work

The Nunes memo released on Feb. 2 had been anticipated as a possible game-changer, at least among many of the president’s supporters,

Soon after it was first released, however, it became clear that its central allegations, of FBI and Department of Justice misdeeds, lacked the power to fundamentally undercut Mueller’s probe. 

Prominent Republicans, including Speaker Paul RyanPaul Davis RyanFive takeaways from McCabe’s allegations against Trump The Hill's 12:30 Report: Sanders set to shake up 2020 race McCabe: No one in 'Gang of Eight' objected to FBI probe into Trump MORE (Wis.) and Rep. Trey GowdyHarold (Trey) Watson GowdyThe family secret Bruce Ohr told Rod Rosenstein about Russia case Trey Gowdy joins Fox News as a contributor Congress must take the next steps on federal criminal justice reforms MORE (S.C.) made that point clear.

The new indictment, however, makes the idea of the Russian investigation as a hoax largely unsustainable.

In a statement on Friday afternoon, Nunes made no mention of the famous memo. Instead he highlighted previous statements he had made about Russia’s “worldwide influence operations.” He also blamed the Obama administration for what he said was a failure to take appropriate action.