JUDY WOODRUFF: Now to the continued fallout over the sprawling indictment of 13 Russian
nationals for intervening in the 2016 presidential election.
In a moment, William Brangham will take an in-depth look at the charges.
But, first, White House correspondent Yamiche Alcindor has some of the backstory, beginning
with the president's reaction.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: President Trump didn't speak publicly about the bombshell indictment during
his weekend away from Washington.
His venting, instead, came through some 20-odd tweets since Saturday.
More than half were related to the indictment or the Russia investigation in general.
In several tweets, including one today, Mr. Trump blamed former President Obama for not
doing enough about Russia's meddling.
Mr. Trump also claimed he -- quote -- "never said Russia didn't meddle in the election."
But last July, in an interview with Reuters, Mr. Trump wouldn't say if he believed Russia
actually meddled in the 2016 election.
Mr. Trump said then that he raised the issue with Putin twice, and that Putin denied any
meddling.
Mr. Trump then told Reuters -- quote -- "So, something happened, and we have to find out
what it is."
Special counsel Robert Mueller's indictment against the Internet Research Agency, other
Russian associates and companies alleges that Russian entities did have -- quote -- "a strategic
goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 U.S. presidential
election, and acted toward that goal."
On Saturday, the president's national security adviser, H.R.
McMaster, left little doubt about where he stood.
H.R.
MCMASTER, U.S. National Security Adviser: As you can see with the FBI indictment, the
evidence is now really incontrovertible and available in the public domain.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Mr. Trump attacked that as well over the weekend.
"General McMaster," he tweeted, "forgot to say that the results of the 2016 election
were not impacted or changed by the Russians."
The indictment does claim that the Russian defendants aimed to hurt some of the 2016
presidential candidates, like Democrat Hillary Clinton, and Republican senators Ted Cruz
and Marco Rubio, and to support President Trump, as well as one Democratic candidate,
independent Senator Bernie Sanders.
Sanders, over the weekend, said that lined up with some of what he knew from 2016.
SEN.
BERNIE SANDERS (I), Vermont: And it turns out that one of our social media guys in San
Diego actually went to the Clinton campaign in September and said, something weird is
going on.
Bernie's not in the campaign.
Hundreds of these people are now coming on to his Facebook site.
So I think we already knew that it was an effort to undermine American democracy and
to really say horrible things about Secretary Clinton.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: The indictment alleges that, as part of the Russian operation, some of
the defendants -- quote -- "traveled to the United States under false pretenses for the
purpose of collecting intelligence to inform defendants' operations."
That's in direct conflict to President Trump's remarks in West Virginia this past August.
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: The Russian story is a total fabrication.
Have you seen any Russians in West Virginia or Ohio or Pennsylvania?
Are there any Russians here tonight?
Any Russians?
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: And when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced the indictment
last week, he went into detail about the rallies that the Russian defendants allegedly helped
arrange using social media.
ROD ROSENSTEIN, U.S. Deputy Attorney General: The Russians also recruited and paid real
Americans to engage in political activities, promote political campaigns, and stage political
rallies.
The defendants and their co-conspirators pretended to be grassroots activists.
According to the indictment, the Americans didn't know that they were communicating with
Russians.
After the election, the defendants allegedly staged rallies to support the president-elect,
while simultaneously staging rallies to protest his election.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: The indictment says that rallies, allegedly boosted by the Russian
defendants, happened before and after the election in Florida, New York, North Carolina,
and Washington, D.C.
At a Senate hearing last week, the administration's intelligence chiefs fielded questions about
whether President Trump specifically asked them to take actions to curb future Russian
election operations.
SEN.
JACK REED (D), Rhode Island: Has the president directed you and your agency to take specific
actions to confront and blunt Russian influence activities that are ongoing?
CHRISTOPHER WRAY, FBI Director: Not as specifically directed by the president, no.
ADM.
MIKE ROGERS, National Security Agency Director: For us, I can't say that I have been explicitly
directed to -- quote -- "blunt" or actively stop.
On the other hand, it's very clear generate knowledge and insight, help us understand
this, so we can generate better policy.
That clearly -- that direction has been very explicit, in fairness.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: The intelligence officials told the panel they had no reason to believe
Russia's efforts would subside.
Mr. Trump claims last week's indictment proves his campaign didn't collude with Russia.
But Mueller's investigation into that possibility continues.
For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Yamiche Alcindor.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: This indictment of over a dozen Russians for committing -- quote -- "information
warfare" on the United States is, without a doubt, a major development in the special
counsel's investigation into Russian meddling in our last election.
Matthew Olsen ran the National Counterterrorism Center during the Obama administration, and
was a longtime federal prosecutor.
Welcome back to the "NewsHour."
MATTHEW OLSEN, Former Director, National Counterterrorism Center: Thanks, William.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So, give me your initial impressions of this indictment.
MATTHEW OLSEN: Yes.
So, I think the most striking thing about the indictment when you read it is the extraordinary
detail that it includes about this information warfare campaign that the Russians carried
out.
This is a speaking indictment, what prosecutors call speaking indictment.
Prosecutors could just lay out the bare elements of the crime, but in this case, the special
counsel went to great pains to establish each of the facts necessary to show this really
systematic effort to conspire against the United States.
And it's important to bear in mind that, for every overt act in this indictment, that means
that the special counsel believes he has provable evidence, he has facts that he can demonstrate
in court to back up these facts, as your opening showed, of infiltration of the United States
by Russian operatives to do all manner of things, including set up phony rallies and
establish fake personas for Americans.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Some have referred to this as a message indictment, meaning, we're not
going to any time soon see any of these Russians put on a plane and extradited to the U.S.
So is Mueller sending a message with this?
Is this laying out in such explicit detail, that's the purpose, in and of itself?
MATTHEW OLSEN: Well, I think it does send that message.
And, as you say, it's unlikely that these individuals will be in the United States in
a courtroom any time soon.
But it does much more than that.
This indictment is a foundational indictment.
It establishes the bedrock foundation of this conspiracy charge on which the special counsel
can now build a broader case.
And I think there's every reason to expect, given the extraordinary detail in this indictment,
as well as the fact that there are a number of cooperating witnesses who have pled guilty
now and are assisting the special counsel, including, for example, Mike Flynn, to expect
that there will be additional charges on top of this foundational charging document.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: In this indictment, there's no specific mention that these operators,
these actors were being told to do what they did by the Kremlin.
That is the assumption that everyone makes.
Do you believe beyond a shadow of a doubt this is a Putin operation?
MATTHEW OLSEN: I believe what the intelligence community has said about this from the early
days of it first being exposed by our intelligence leaders and officials.
And that is that this type of operation wouldn't occur without explicit direction of the Kremlin,
including Putin himself.
And I think that's absolutely consistent with everything I have seen.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: You mentioned that this is building the foundation for further possible
conspiracy charges.
What else about this?
Does this give you any greater sense of where the probe is going forward?
MATTHEW OLSEN: It does.
Again, this is a conspiracy charge that just charged the Russian side of this.
I think that that, in my view, is potentially a strategic decision by the special counsel
to make this a very apolitical charging document, because it's focused on the Russians.
But if you look at the document itself, it talks about the grand jury charged individuals
known and unknown who conspired, that there are others who are known and unknown to the
grand jury who are part of this.
So, again, there are other charges.
For example, the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, we know that's a crime.
That's not charged here.
Obstruction of justice is also within the purview of this investigation.
So, again, I think there's every reason to expect that this is really the first major
salvo in what is likely to be additional charges with other crimes, as well as other individuals
charged.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: All of the intel chiefs have said Russia meddled and they they're
going to -- were going to do it again.
For the record, the White House gave us a statement today, saying that President Trump
does take this very seriously, that he's going to do everything he can to defend the next
election.
They pointed out that they held a hearing last week with state and local election officials
to talk about meddling.
Do you think, looking at the landscape now, that we are doing enough to defend the next
election from this kind of attack?
MATTHEW OLSEN: You know, there have been some signs of additional efforts being done, but
I think the answer to your question is definitively no.
We lack from the very top, from the leader, from the commander in chief, a definitive
statement saying that this was the Russians and that he is not going to blame others,
for example, President Obama, but he is going to blame the people who are responsible.
And that is the Russians, including the Russian government.
And there are lots -- there's lots more that he can do, that the president can do, and
the government can do to make Russia pay a price, including sanctions and including other
activities that the government can -- our government can undertake.
As of this point, the president really hasn't stepped up to his constitutional obligation
to defend our democracy.
He's actually failed to do that.
And I think that's what we will be looking for in the future from the president.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Matthew Olsen, thank you very much.
MATTHEW OLSEN: Thank you.