The crime of conspiracy is an intentional agreement between at least two people to commit a crime and then act on it.

Donald Trump’s inner circle cooperated too many times with Vladimir Putin’s inner circle, maybe enough for the crime of receiving help to sway an election from a foreign power. Many of those meetings included exchanges of election-related information.

But finding evidence of conspiracy was Robert Mueller’s problem.

Proving conspiracy can be very difficult because proving the agreement part is tricky and might depend on circumstantial evidence.

During the Mueller hearings, Rep. Val Demings asked the key question to Robert Mueller: “Witnesses lied to your office and to Congress. Those lies materially impaired the investigation … . Is it fair to say then that … lies by Trump campaign officials and administration officials impeded your investigation?”

Mueller generally agreed.

Former federal prosecutor and MSNBC contributor Joyce Vance explains that the lies ultimately impacted Mueller’s ability to prove conspiracy.

I am just a voter, so my standard of proof is more civil than criminal.

While Mueller did not have enough conclusive evidence to charge Donald Trump with criminal conspiracy, there is a preponderance of known, meaningful contacts between Russians and people in Trump’s circle, and, with Russian help, Trump won the election. A reasonable man could assume conspiracy.

Conspiracy with a foreign power is one of the most dangerous circumstances for a president because he or she remains under the influence of the foreign power and cannot ever be trusted. I do not trust Donald Trump enough to vote for him under any circumstances, and I do not trust any politician who continues to support Trump.

The cloud of conspiracy, by itself, should be enough.

Peter Konieczko

Scarborough

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Letter to the editor: President Trump acts like a dictator

Next »

Letter to the editor: Combat plague of bad driving by following road rules