Possible financial crimes
We know less about this prong than the other two. The Post reported last month that “in addition to possible coordination between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 presidential election, investigators are also looking broadly into possible financial crimes — but the people familiar with the matter, who were not authorized to speak publicly, did not specify who or what was being examined.”
Although the evidence for Russia’s interference appears convincing, it is too easy to allow such an account to become the master narrative of Trump’s ascent—a way to explain the presence of a man who is so alien and discomforting to so much of the population by rendering him in some way foreign. In truth, he is a phenomenon of America’s own making.
At the same time, Trump’s management style as President has been so chaotic, so improvisational, that the daily bonfire sometimes obscures what has been put in place.
The Russian government, at the behest of Russian President Vladimir Putin, waged a sustained influence operation in the United States in support of Donald Trump’s campaign for president. Major questions remain about the degree of interaction between Trump associates and Russian operatives.
Here’s what we know so far based on news reports, public statements and the U.S. government’s unclassified report on Russian election interference.
The ongoing saga has many parts, but it centers around what relationship, if any, Trump’s campaign may have had with Russia. Here’s a rundown of what issues are at play.