'Russiagate' revisited: What you should know about the Mueller probe

The death last week of Robert Mueller, the special counsel who oversaw the probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election, revived acrimonious controversies over "Russiagate" — further goaded by President Donald Trump's "I'm glad he's dead" social media post. The reaction from many on the right has been to say that while the president's attack was unseemly, the Mueller investigation was part of an equally deplorable political witch hunt.

But that's a false narrative. A careful look shows that the investigation was not only justified but necessary — and that, while some allegations about the Trump-Russia connection were false or overhyped, Mueller handled the matter with careful professionalism.

Ironically, many critics of the Mueller probe also claim that his report "exonerated" Trump and disproved allegations of Trump "collusion" with the Kremlin. In fact, while Mueller found no evidence that the Trump campaign was involved in a criminal conspiracy, he established that (1) Russia interfered in the 2016 election in a variety of ways, from social media misinformation to hacking and leaks of emails from the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee; and (2) Trump and his associates happily exploited that material.

Because of media sensationalism, many associate Russiagate with salacious reports of a video showing Trump in a lurid situation with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel. In fact, the 2016 FBI investigation into possible Trump campaign contacts with Russian operatives was triggered by a tip that a campaign staffer was boasting about such contacts. Suspicions were also fueled by Trump's praise for Russian President Vladimir Putin, his public invitation to Russia to hack Clinton's emails, and the presence of individuals with ties to pro-Kremlin Russian circles on the Trump campaign (including then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort).

In October, WikiLeaks — a known vehicle for documents obtained by Kremlin-linked hackers — started releasing the hacked Clinton campaign and DNC emails in ways that helped Trump. Not investigating would have been irresponsible.

As president, Trump repeatedly obstructed the investigation. Mueller, a former FBI director himself, was appointed as special counsel by a senior Trump Justice Department official in May 2017 under extraordinary circumstances: Having fired FBI Director James Comey, Trump had bragged about it to top Russian diplomats in an Oval Office huddle, saying that the pressure on him over Russian interference was now "taken off."

As a result of the Mueller probe, several high-level Trump campaign figures were convicted or pleaded guilty. (Thirteen Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted for election interference.) Trump associate Roger Stone was convicted of lying to Congress about his contacts with WikiLeaks; Trump commuted his sentence and then pardoned him in December 2020. Later, the bipartisan report of the Senate Intelligence Committee — co-chaired by current Secretary of State Marco Rubio — concluded that Stone's contact with WikiLeaks about the hacked documents were even more extensive than previously known. There's also credible evidence Trump knew about those contacts.

It is also worth noting that attempts to discredit the Mueller inquiry, and the underlying FBI investigation, began almost at once; two reviews initiated by Attorney General Bill Barr under the first Trump administration found only minor errors. Last year, even more aggressive attempts to portray Russiagate as a "hoax" were made by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and FBI Director Kash Patel. But none of the documents they declassified supported this claim.

Mueller's integrity and public service are a stark contrast to Trump's crass self-seeking. In that sense, Trump's nasty post was a fitting obituary.

Opinions expressed by Cathy Young, a writer for The Bulwark, are her own.

By Cathy Young

Cathy Young is a writer for The Bulwark.