‘A Specter Of Treason Hovers Over Donald Trump’ After Dismissing Conclusion By Intelligence Agencies That Russia Waged Cyberwarfare Against The U.S., Law Expert Warns

John Shattuck, a legal expert and former Assistant Secretary of State, has warned that “a specter of treason hovers over” President-elect Donald Trump, following his denigration of the conclusion by multiple U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia engaged in cyberwarfare against the U.S and his dismissal of a bipartisan call for an investigation of alleged Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

In an opinion piece published by the Boston Globe on December 16, 2016, Shattuck, a professor of practice in diplomacy at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, argued that with 17 U.S. intelligence agencies having concluded unanimously that Russia engaged in cyber warfare against the U.S., and the CIA having reached the conclusion that Russian hacking was conducted to influence the election in favor of Trump, the president-elect’s continued dismissal of bipartisan calls for investigation makes him vulnerable to treason charges.

The senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Carr Center for Human Rights Policy also referred to a statement by a senior intelligence official that there is evidence that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin authorized the cyber attacks.

“A specter of treason hovers over Donald Trump,” Shattuck warned ominously. “He has brought it on himself by dismissing a bipartisan call for an investigation of Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee as a ‘ridiculous’ political attack on the legitimacy of his election as president.”

Trump had dismissed the conclusion by the intelligence agencies that Russia engaged in cyber warfare against the country, saying that calls for an investigation were politically-motivated attacks to undermine the legitimacy of his election victory.

But Shattuck argued that it was unwise for Trump to continue dismissing the unanimous conclusion by multiple intelligence agencies. He wondered why Trump was disavowing the 17 national intelligence agencies and a bipartisan call for a congressional investigation, pointing out that as president-elect, Trump has a strong interest in a matter of national security that involves interference by a foreign power in the nation’s electoral process, the foundation of its democracy.

Shattuck proposed several possible reasons why Trump appears to be shirking his responsibility to prioritize an issue of national security that transcends partisanship.

The first possible reason, according to Shattuck, is that Trump is trying to defend his political standing ahead of the Electoral College vote on Monday, December 19.

The second is that Trump is trying to undermine public confidence in the national intelligence agencies so as to strengthen his hand against them as president.

The third possible reason that follows from the second is that Trump is hoping that he would be able to steer popular opinion in his favor and make the public support him against the intelligence agencies by following “his version of the truth about national security threats.”

The fourth possible reason is that Trump is trying to conceal evidence of the involvement of members of his campaign or himself in the alleged Russian cyber attacks against the country.

Shattuck argued that in all four scenarios Trump is engaging in actions that fall under the formal definition of the federal crime of treason. Any of the four possible reasons for dismissing the unanimous conclusion of the intelligence agencies expose Trump to a situation where his behavior could be interpreted legitimately as treasonous.

The law expert reminded readers that treason is an offense committed where a person who owes allegiance to the United States “adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort.”

Misprision of treason, according to Shattuck, is committed by a person who has “knowledge of the commission of any treason [but] conceals [it] and does not disclose it.”

By dismissing or attempting to block investigation of alleged Russian cyberattacks against the U.S., Trump could be found guilty of giving aid or comfort to an enemy of the United States. And his crime could be compounded if it is found that he covered up his knowledge or involvement, or the knowledge or involvement of any of his staff, in the alleged Russian cyberattacks.

The writer cited a statement by Admiral Mike Rogers, director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and commander of the U.S. Cyber Command.

According to Admiral Rogers, as reported by CBS News, the cyber warfare waged by Russia against the U.S. “was not something that was done casually, this was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation state to attempt to achieve a specific effect.”

Although Shattuck admitted that no direct evidence has been produced to show that Trump had knowledge of or was involved in the hacks allegedly perpetrated by the Russians, many factors raise suspicion that he has not been telling the whole truth about ongoing contact or collusion between his campaign and the Russian government.

The first is that Paul Manafort, former campaign manager for Trump, is known to have had extensive political links with the Russian government.

Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump’s choice for the position of National Security Adviser, appeared on Russian state television as a commentator and attended a Russian gala where he sat with Putin, as reported by Vox.

During his campaign, Trump praised Putin on several occasions, even saying he was a better leader than President Barack Obama. Trump has also, on multiple occasions, taken positions that were in the interest of the Russian government.

Shattuck recalled that the New York Times reported recently that during a gathering of real estate investors in 2008, Donald Trump Jr., the president-elect’s son, said that the “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.”

“We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia,” he added reportedly.

The New York Times also quoted Sergei Ryabokov, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, admitting, two days after the general election, that there had been contacts between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign and that some of Trump’s campaign aides “were staying in touch with Russian representatives.”

Shattuck advised Trump, saying that the only way that he (Trump) could avoid the “specter of treason hovering over him” was to “clear the air” by supporting calls for investigation of the allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 general election because the questions of national security raised by the allegations undermine the legitimacy of his presidency and make him vulnerable to charges of treason.

[Featured Image by Evan Vucci/AP Images]