President Donald Trump and his lawyers are laying out an extraordinarily expansive vision of executive authority that scholars say is mostly untested in court and could portend a drawn-out fight with the prosecutors now investigating him.

A memo submitted by the president's lawyers to special counsel Robert Mueller asserts as fact that presidents cannot obstruct justice because, as the country's chief law enforcement officer, they have ultimate control of the Justice Department and executive branch.

His lawyers have repeatedly insisted that it's beyond dispute that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted, while Trump tweeted Monday that he has the "absolute right" to pardon himself.

As Mueller's investigation moves forward, courts may have to confront questions with minimal if any historical precedent.

Those include whether a president can be forced to answer questions from prosecutors, whether it's possible for a commander-in-chief to criminally interfere in investigations and whether a president's broad pardon power can be deployed for corrupt purposes.

Mueller is investigating whether Trump associates coordinated with Russia during the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump took steps to shut down that investigation through actions including the firing of FBI Director James Comey.

Though Trump insists he did nothing wrong, the statements from him and his lawyers, including the January memo to Mueller, make clear how much of their defense revolves around establishing that he was constitutionally empowered to take the actions he took that are now under investigation.

The defense argument suggests that protocols meant to protect against abuses of power are merely norms the American public has come to expect, rather than laws binding upon a president.

There's some historical precedent for the court clash that could be instigated by the Trump investigation, but in many ways the arguments remain unsettled and tested.

The Supreme Court has never definitively ruled on the question of whether a president could be forced to testify, though the justices in 1974 did rule that President Richard Nixon had to turn over recordings and documents that had been subpoenaed.

TWITTER @RealDonaldTrump

Internet - 4 June 2018

1. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!"

2. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "The appointment of the Special Counsel is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Despite that, we play the game because I, unlike the Democrats, have done nothing wrong!"

ASSOCIATED PRESS

3. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So President Donald Trump tweeted this morning that he has the absolute power to pardon himself if he wants to, though he quickly added that he has no intention of doing so because he's done nothing wrong."

POOL

Washington - 1 June 2018

4. Trump walking toward camera

ASSOCIATED PRESS

5. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what the president is getting at is actually something that has been historically untested, so nobody actually really knows whether it is true or not if the president can pardon himself because there's never been a Supreme Court that's weighed in on the opinion because frankly no president has ever thought to try to pardon himself or been in the position where they were going to do that. So, we're getting into unchartered territory to the extend that we're talking about this is a reasonable possibility. It's never reached the Supreme Court. I would however note that there is a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion from 1974 that suggests the president cannot act as his or her own judge. And so therefore would mitigate against pardoning himself or herself."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 1 June 2018

6. Trump walking on White House lawn

ASSOCIATED PRESS

7. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what we're seeing from the series of public statements and tweets both from the president and his lawyers are really expansive visions of constitutional presidential authority and power. And so we are realizing that the defense for the president in the Mueller investigation is not so much a factual defense about what I did or didn't do as much as as I am president and therefore I am entitled to carry out the very acts that you're now investigating me for and so if I want to fire the FBI director, I can. If I want to ask the FBI director to shut down a particular investigation. I can. I'm the president. I control the executive branch. And so we are now getting into fairly untested arguments about the scope of the constitutional authorities vested in the president."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 13 June 2013

8. Robert Mueller testifies on Capitol Hill

ASSOCIATED PRESS

9. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So a lot's going to depend on whether the president consents to an interview. So if he agrees to an interview, that would sort of seem to suggest there won't be a hugely drawn out court fight. If he rejects the interview request formally and then Mueller chooses to subpoena, him which is not something that we're aware that he's going to do. But should he subpoena him, we will anticipate a very significant court fight, potentially up to the Supreme Court that will really test some of these issues that we're talking about, whether the president can be subpoenaed for his testimony, whether he could be compelled to speak to investigators. These are really significant issues that suggest that a big court fight could be ahead."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Beijing - 13 June 2013

10. Mueller at news conference

ASSOCIATED PRESS

11. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"I guess what's really interesting to me, at least, is how much of this is truly unknown. So you have legal experts and academics on one side of the spectrum who say this can never happen. You have others who say, 'well actually, technically when you look at the Constitution it doesn't preclude the types of behaviors or responses that the president's talking about.' So to the extent that we are moving into areas that we've never been before. I think there's going to be an opportunity to create new law and there's not going to be much to look at that guides us in terms of this is the one true right answer. So it's sort of fascinating in that sense."

POOL

Joint Base Andrews - 31 May 2018

12. Trump walking up steps to Air Force One

President Donald Trump and his lawyers are laying out an extraordinarily expansive vision of executive authority that scholars say is mostly untested in court and could portend a drawn-out fight with the prosecutors now investigating him.

A memo submitted by the president's lawyers to special counsel Robert Mueller asserts as fact that presidents cannot obstruct justice because, as the country's chief law enforcement officer, they have ultimate control of the Justice Department and executive branch.

His lawyers have repeatedly insisted that it's beyond dispute that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted, while Trump tweeted Monday that he has the "absolute right" to pardon himself.

As Mueller's investigation moves forward, courts may have to confront questions with minimal if any historical precedent.

Those include whether a president can be forced to answer questions from prosecutors, whether it's possible for a commander-in-chief to criminally interfere in investigations and whether a president's broad pardon power can be deployed for corrupt purposes.

Mueller is investigating whether Trump associates coordinated with Russia during the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump took steps to shut down that investigation through actions including the firing of FBI Director James Comey.

Though Trump insists he did nothing wrong, the statements from him and his lawyers, including the January memo to Mueller, make clear how much of their defense revolves around establishing that he was constitutionally empowered to take the actions he took that are now under investigation.

The defense argument suggests that protocols meant to protect against abuses of power are merely norms the American public has come to expect, rather than laws binding upon a president.

There's some historical precedent for the court clash that could be instigated by the Trump investigation, but in many ways the arguments remain unsettled and tested.

The Supreme Court has never definitively ruled on the question of whether a president could be forced to testify, though the justices in 1974 did rule that President Richard Nixon had to turn over recordings and documents that had been subpoenaed.

TWITTER @RealDonaldTrump

Internet - 4 June 2018

1. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!"

2. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "The appointment of the Special Counsel is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Despite that, we play the game because I, unlike the Democrats, have done nothing wrong!"

ASSOCIATED PRESS

3. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So President Donald Trump tweeted this morning that he has the absolute power to pardon himself if he wants to, though he quickly added that he has no intention of doing so because he's done nothing wrong."

POOL

Washington - 1 June 2018

4. Trump walking toward camera

ASSOCIATED PRESS

5. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what the president is getting at is actually something that has been historically untested, so nobody actually really knows whether it is true or not if the president can pardon himself because there's never been a Supreme Court that's weighed in on the opinion because frankly no president has ever thought to try to pardon himself or been in the position where they were going to do that. So, we're getting into unchartered territory to the extend that we're talking about this is a reasonable possibility. It's never reached the Supreme Court. I would however note that there is a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion from 1974 that suggests the president cannot act as his or her own judge. And so therefore would mitigate against pardoning himself or herself."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 1 June 2018

6. Trump walking on White House lawn

ASSOCIATED PRESS

7. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what we're seeing from the series of public statements and tweets both from the president and his lawyers are really expansive visions of constitutional presidential authority and power. And so we are realizing that the defense for the president in the Mueller investigation is not so much a factual defense about what I did or didn't do as much as as I am president and therefore I am entitled to carry out the very acts that you're now investigating me for and so if I want to fire the FBI director, I can. If I want to ask the FBI director to shut down a particular investigation. I can. I'm the president. I control the executive branch. And so we are now getting into fairly untested arguments about the scope of the constitutional authorities vested in the president."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 13 June 2013

8. Robert Mueller testifies on Capitol Hill

ASSOCIATED PRESS

9. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So a lot's going to depend on whether the president consents to an interview. So if he agrees to an interview, that would sort of seem to suggest there won't be a hugely drawn out court fight. If he rejects the interview request formally and then Mueller chooses to subpoena, him which is not something that we're aware that he's going to do. But should he subpoena him, we will anticipate a very significant court fight, potentially up to the Supreme Court that will really test some of these issues that we're talking about, whether the president can be subpoenaed for his testimony, whether he could be compelled to speak to investigators. These are really significant issues that suggest that a big court fight could be ahead."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Beijing - 13 June 2013

10. Mueller at news conference

ASSOCIATED PRESS

11. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"I guess what's really interesting to me, at least, is how much of this is truly unknown. So you have legal experts and academics on one side of the spectrum who say this can never happen. You have others who say, 'well actually, technically when you look at the Constitution it doesn't preclude the types of behaviors or responses that the president's talking about.' So to the extent that we are moving into areas that we've never been before. I think there's going to be an opportunity to create new law and there's not going to be much to look at that guides us in terms of this is the one true right answer. So it's sort of fascinating in that sense."

POOL

Joint Base Andrews - 31 May 2018

12. Trump walking up steps to Air Force One

An associate of former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone allowed himself to be held in contempt of court Friday in a fresh attempt to challenge Robert Mueller's appointment as special counsel investigating possible Russian collusion during the 2016 presidential campaign.

The move spotlighted a growing focus by Mueller on Stone as another of his associates, a New York woman known as the "Manhattan Madam" for once running an upscale escort service, was expected to appear before a grand jury but had not yet done so as of Friday afternoon.

Paul Kamenar, the attorney for Stone associate Andrew Miller, argued that Mueller's appointment is unconstitutional, asserting that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein did not have the authority to appoint Mueller to lead the investigation, which President Donald Trump has sought to undermine by calling it a "witch hunt" and a "hoax."

Kamenar also said a prosecutor with powers as broad as Mueller's should be subject to Senate confirmation, like U.S. attorneys are.

"So our point is if the U.S. attorneys have to be approved by the United States Senate, so, too, should Mr. Mueller," Kamenar told reporters outside the courthouse.

Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel last year after Attorney General Jeff Sessions stepped aside from overseeing the Russia investigation.

Mueller appears to be putting a spotlight on Stone, a longtime informal adviser to Trump. Stone was mentioned, though not by name, in a sweeping indictment accusing 12 Russian military intelligence officers of hacking into the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, Trump's Democratic opponent, and the Democratic Party, and releasing tens of thousands of private communications in a sweeping conspiracy orchestrated by the Kremlin to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election.

Miller worked for Stone during Trump's campaign. Kamenar said his client planned to appeal the contempt ruling in hope that the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually hear the case.

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington, DC - 10 August 2018

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff Horwitz, Associated Press:

"So today we were expecting Kristen Davis who is a former madam and compatriot of Roger Stone to arrive at the DC federal courthouse and speak to the grand jury. We haven't seen that happen yet today."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

New York - 6 August 2013

2. STILL photo of Kristen Davis leaving the Manhattan federal court with her attorney

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington, DC - 10 August 2018

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff Horwitz, Associated Press:

"So today Roger Stone assistant Andrew Miller was supposed to come speak to the grand jury. Instead, however, his lawyer came out and announced that he is not going to be appearing, is going to be in contempt and will basically be appealing his entire need to appear in the first place as part of an effort to question the legitimacy of the entire Robert Miller probe. His attorney said that he believes this is capable of going to the Supreme Court and that Robert Mueller's appointment is unconstitutional and this is the best way to challenge that."

POOL

Washington, DC - 26 September 2017

4. Roger Stone speaking to the press at the Capitol

++AUDIO AS INCOMING ON FOLLOWING SOUNDBITES++

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington, DC - 10 August 2018

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Paul Kamenar, attorney for Andrew Miller:

"No, the reason he's not talking to the special counsel is because he has to not talk to the grand jury in order for him to get a contempt. He's not being recalcitrant. He's been more than cooperative with special counsel. He's been interviewed by two FBI agents months ago. We've supplied the documents that the government requested. So the only thing that was the linchpin in order for us to get this appeal was this final, you have to appear before the grand jury. And at that point he respectfully declined. He was not being contumacious. We made it clear that he was doing this solely as a necessary step to appeal the decision."

6. Wide shot of Paul Kamenar outside the courthouse

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Paul Kamenar, attorney for Andrew Miller:

"So our point is if US attorneys have to be approved by the United States Senate, so too should Mr. Mueller. And therefore, that argument is what we made, the court rejected that argument in its opinion last week. That opinion has been unsealed and now we are taking the opportunity to bring this to the Court of Appeals here and ultimately to the Supreme Court."

8. Wide shot of Paul Kamenar outside the courthouse

An associate of former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone allowed himself to be held in contempt of court Friday in a fresh attempt to challenge Robert Mueller's appointment as special counsel investigating possible Russian collusion during the 2016 presidential campaign.

The move spotlighted a growing focus by Mueller on Stone as another of his associates, a New York woman known as the "Manhattan Madam" for once running an upscale escort service, was expected to appear before a grand jury but had not yet done so as of Friday afternoon.

Paul Kamenar, the attorney for Stone associate Andrew Miller, argued that Mueller's appointment is unconstitutional, asserting that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein did not have the authority to appoint Mueller to lead the investigation, which President Donald Trump has sought to undermine by calling it a "witch hunt" and a "hoax."

Kamenar also said a prosecutor with powers as broad as Mueller's should be subject to Senate confirmation, like U.S. attorneys are.

"So our point is if the U.S. attorneys have to be approved by the United States Senate, so, too, should Mr. Mueller," Kamenar told reporters outside the courthouse.

Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel last year after Attorney General Jeff Sessions stepped aside from overseeing the Russia investigation.

Mueller appears to be putting a spotlight on Stone, a longtime informal adviser to Trump. Stone was mentioned, though not by name, in a sweeping indictment accusing 12 Russian military intelligence officers of hacking into the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, Trump's Democratic opponent, and the Democratic Party, and releasing tens of thousands of private communications in a sweeping conspiracy orchestrated by the Kremlin to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election.

Miller worked for Stone during Trump's campaign. Kamenar said his client planned to appeal the contempt ruling in hope that the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually hear the case.

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington, DC - 10 August 2018

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff Horwitz, Associated Press:

"So today we were expecting Kristen Davis who is a former madam and compatriot of Roger Stone to arrive at the DC federal courthouse and speak to the grand jury. We haven't seen that happen yet today."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

New York - 6 August 2013

2. STILL photo of Kristen Davis leaving the Manhattan federal court with her attorney

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington, DC - 10 August 2018

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Jeff Horwitz, Associated Press:

"So today Roger Stone assistant Andrew Miller was supposed to come speak to the grand jury. Instead, however, his lawyer came out and announced that he is not going to be appearing, is going to be in contempt and will basically be appealing his entire need to appear in the first place as part of an effort to question the legitimacy of the entire Robert Miller probe. His attorney said that he believes this is capable of going to the Supreme Court and that Robert Mueller's appointment is unconstitutional and this is the best way to challenge that."

POOL

Washington, DC - 26 September 2017

4. Roger Stone speaking to the press at the Capitol

++AUDIO AS INCOMING ON FOLLOWING SOUNDBITES++

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington, DC - 10 August 2018

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Paul Kamenar, attorney for Andrew Miller:

"No, the reason he's not talking to the special counsel is because he has to not talk to the grand jury in order for him to get a contempt. He's not being recalcitrant. He's been more than cooperative with special counsel. He's been interviewed by two FBI agents months ago. We've supplied the documents that the government requested. So the only thing that was the linchpin in order for us to get this appeal was this final, you have to appear before the grand jury. And at that point he respectfully declined. He was not being contumacious. We made it clear that he was doing this solely as a necessary step to appeal the decision."

6. Wide shot of Paul Kamenar outside the courthouse

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Paul Kamenar, attorney for Andrew Miller:

"So our point is if US attorneys have to be approved by the United States Senate, so too should Mr. Mueller. And therefore, that argument is what we made, the court rejected that argument in its opinion last week. That opinion has been unsealed and now we are taking the opportunity to bring this to the Court of Appeals here and ultimately to the Supreme Court."

8. Wide shot of Paul Kamenar outside the courthouse

Twelve Russian military intelligence officers hacked into the Clinton presidential campaign and Democratic Party, releasing tens of thousands of stolen communications, in a sweeping effort by a foreign government to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election, according to a grand jury indictment announced days before President Donald Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The indictment stands as the clearest Justice Department allegation yet of Russian efforts to interfere, through illegal hacking, in the U.S. presidential election before Americans went to the polls - and the first to implicate the Russian government directly. It had been sought by special counsel Robert Mueller.

"Contrary to Putin's assertions, this indictment does allege that these 12 people actually worked for a Russian intelligence agency. So they are an arm of the Russian government," AP Reporter Eric Tucker said. "So it becomes increasingly impossible, if this is proven then in court or established by the government somehow... to say that the Kremlin, that the Russian government had no part in this."

U.S. intelligence agencies have said the meddling was aimed at helping the Trump campaign and harming the election bid of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. The effort also included bogus Facebook ads and social media postings that prosecutors say were aimed at influencing public opinion and sowing discord on hot-button social issues.

The indictment lays out a sweeping effort starting in March 2016 to break into key Democratic email accounts, such as those belonging to the Democratic National Committee, the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Among those targeted was John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman.

The Kremlin denied anew that it tried to sway the election. "The Russian state has never interfered and has no intention of interfering in the U.S. elections," Putin's foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, said Friday.

Washington - 13 July 2018

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Today, the Justice Department announced the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers, who are accused of hacking into Democratic email accounts, including the email account of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 presidential election."

2. Rod Rosenstein walks out to podium

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"The indictment alleges a vast and coordinated effort to break into these email accounts, steal emails and then release them in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election in what prosecutors say was an effort to criminally interfere in the 2016 presidential election and in American politics. These Russians are not in custody, but this is part of what the Justice Department describes as a 'name and shame' strategy, which is a way to effectively identify the people in foreign governments and foreign countries who have committed these acts, these cyber attacks and effectively announce to the world that they have been identified and the Justice Department for years has now seen this as a deterrent for future hacks."

4. Rod Rosenstein speaking at podium

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Notably, this indictment does not allege any sort of contact between Trump campaign members or associates and these Russian intelligence officers. It doesn't say that anybody who was in touch with the Russian intelligence officers or any of their conduits were aware or knew that they were having communication with Russian intelligence officers. And so immediately, the White House and President Donald Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, have seized on that fact to basically say, look, this is proof of no collusion. However, we don't know what we don't know. And there are certainly additional shoes that could drop going down the road. It's impossible to rule out any additional developments."

6. Rod Rosenstein speaking at podium

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"President Trump is supposed to meet with Vladimir Putin on Monday, so this indictment comes just three days before that meeting. It also comes as the president is currently in England, where he is going to be having meetings with the royal family. So this is certainly not a development that the president wants to have to deal with as he's trying to have these foreign meetings, including with Vladimir Putin. One thing he has said is that of course he's going to bring up the Russian hacking with Putin, although he has said: 'what do you expect him (Putin) to say, do you expect him to effectively admit guilt or say that he did it?'"

8. Wide of Rosenstein speaking

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"But it is important to note that, contrary to Putin's assertions, this indictment does allege that these 12 people actually worked for a Russian intelligence agency. So they are an arm of the Russian government. So it becomes increasingly impossible, if this is proven then in court or established by the government somehow, that that these are the people who responsible for the hack to say that the Kremlin, that the Russian government had no part in this - that that is belied by the allegations in this indictment."

10. Wide of Rosenstein speaking

11. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Prior to today, there have been 20 criminal charges brought in Mueller's investigation. That includes 13 Russians who were accused in a very hidden, but powerful, social media effort to influence American public opinion. It also includes four Trump campaign and White House aides, former aides, three of them have pleaded guilty and have agreed to cooperate with Mueller. So this is an ongoing investigation, but we are now talking about more than 30 people who have been charged in Mueller's investigation."

12. Rosenstein leaves after speaking

Twelve Russian military intelligence officers hacked into the Clinton presidential campaign and Democratic Party, releasing tens of thousands of stolen communications, in a sweeping effort by a foreign government to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election, according to a grand jury indictment announced days before President Donald Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The indictment stands as the clearest Justice Department allegation yet of Russian efforts to interfere, through illegal hacking, in the U.S. presidential election before Americans went to the polls - and the first to implicate the Russian government directly. It had been sought by special counsel Robert Mueller.

"Contrary to Putin's assertions, this indictment does allege that these 12 people actually worked for a Russian intelligence agency. So they are an arm of the Russian government," AP Reporter Eric Tucker said. "So it becomes increasingly impossible, if this is proven then in court or established by the government somehow... to say that the Kremlin, that the Russian government had no part in this."

U.S. intelligence agencies have said the meddling was aimed at helping the Trump campaign and harming the election bid of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. The effort also included bogus Facebook ads and social media postings that prosecutors say were aimed at influencing public opinion and sowing discord on hot-button social issues.

The indictment lays out a sweeping effort starting in March 2016 to break into key Democratic email accounts, such as those belonging to the Democratic National Committee, the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Among those targeted was John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman.

The Kremlin denied anew that it tried to sway the election. "The Russian state has never interfered and has no intention of interfering in the U.S. elections," Putin's foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, said Friday.

Washington - 13 July 2018

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Today, the Justice Department announced the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers, who are accused of hacking into Democratic email accounts, including the email account of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 presidential election."

2. Rod Rosenstein walks out to podium

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"The indictment alleges a vast and coordinated effort to break into these email accounts, steal emails and then release them in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election in what prosecutors say was an effort to criminally interfere in the 2016 presidential election and in American politics. These Russians are not in custody, but this is part of what the Justice Department describes as a 'name and shame' strategy, which is a way to effectively identify the people in foreign governments and foreign countries who have committed these acts, these cyber attacks and effectively announce to the world that they have been identified and the Justice Department for years has now seen this as a deterrent for future hacks."

4. Rod Rosenstein speaking at podium

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Notably, this indictment does not allege any sort of contact between Trump campaign members or associates and these Russian intelligence officers. It doesn't say that anybody who was in touch with the Russian intelligence officers or any of their conduits were aware or knew that they were having communication with Russian intelligence officers. And so immediately, the White House and President Donald Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, have seized on that fact to basically say, look, this is proof of no collusion. However, we don't know what we don't know. And there are certainly additional shoes that could drop going down the road. It's impossible to rule out any additional developments."

6. Rod Rosenstein speaking at podium

7. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"President Trump is supposed to meet with Vladimir Putin on Monday, so this indictment comes just three days before that meeting. It also comes as the president is currently in England, where he is going to be having meetings with the royal family. So this is certainly not a development that the president wants to have to deal with as he's trying to have these foreign meetings, including with Vladimir Putin. One thing he has said is that of course he's going to bring up the Russian hacking with Putin, although he has said: 'what do you expect him (Putin) to say, do you expect him to effectively admit guilt or say that he did it?'"

8. Wide of Rosenstein speaking

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"But it is important to note that, contrary to Putin's assertions, this indictment does allege that these 12 people actually worked for a Russian intelligence agency. So they are an arm of the Russian government. So it becomes increasingly impossible, if this is proven then in court or established by the government somehow, that that these are the people who responsible for the hack to say that the Kremlin, that the Russian government had no part in this - that that is belied by the allegations in this indictment."

10. Wide of Rosenstein speaking

11. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Prior to today, there have been 20 criminal charges brought in Mueller's investigation. That includes 13 Russians who were accused in a very hidden, but powerful, social media effort to influence American public opinion. It also includes four Trump campaign and White House aides, former aides, three of them have pleaded guilty and have agreed to cooperate with Mueller. So this is an ongoing investigation, but we are now talking about more than 30 people who have been charged in Mueller's investigation."

12. Rosenstein leaves after speaking

FOR CLEAN VERSION SEE STORY NUMBER: apus100690

Twelve Russian military intelligence officers hacked into the Clinton presidential campaign and Democratic Party, releasing tens of thousands of stolen communications, in a sweeping effort by a foreign government to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election, according to a grand jury indictment announced days before President Donald Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The indictment stands as the clearest Justice Department allegation yet of Russian efforts to interfere, through illegal hacking, in the U.S. presidential election before Americans went to the polls - and the first to implicate the Russian government directly. It had been sought by special counsel Robert Mueller.

"Contrary to Putin's assertions, this indictment does allege that these 12 people actually worked for a Russian intelligence agency. So they are an arm of the Russian government," AP Reporter Eric Tucker said. "So it becomes increasingly impossible, if this is proven then in court or established by the government somehow... to say that the Kremlin, that the Russian government had no part in this."

U.S. intelligence agencies have said the meddling was aimed at helping the Trump campaign and harming the election bid of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. The effort also included bogus Facebook ads and social media postings that prosecutors say were aimed at influencing public opinion and sowing discord on hot-button social issues.

The indictment lays out a sweeping effort starting in March 2016 to break into key Democratic email accounts, such as those belonging to the Democratic National Committee, the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Among those targeted was John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman.

The Kremlin denied anew that it tried to sway the election. "The Russian state has never interfered and has no intention of interfering in the U.S. elections," Putin's foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, said Friday.

Washington - 13 July 2018

++SOUNDBITES PARTIALLY COVERED WITH IMAGES++

1. Rod Rosenstein walks out to podium

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Today, the Justice Department announced the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers, who are accused of hacking into Democratic email accounts, including the email account of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 presidential election."

2. Rod Rosenstein speaking at podium

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"The indictment alleges a vast and coordinated effort to break into these email accounts, steal emails and then release them in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election in what prosecutors say was an effort to criminally interfere in the 2016 presidential election and in American politics. These Russians are not in custody, but this is part of what the Justice Department describes as a 'name and shame' strategy, which is a way to effectively identify the people in foreign governments and foreign countries who have committed these acts, these cyber attacks and effectively announce to the world that they have been identified and the Justice Department for years has now seen this as a deterrent for future hacks."

4. Rod Rosenstein speaking at podium

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"Notably, this indictment does not allege any sort of contact between Trump campaign members or associates and these Russian intelligence officers. It doesn't say that anybody who was in touch with the Russian intelligence officers or any of their conduits were aware or knew that they were having communication with Russian intelligence officers. And so immediately, the White House and President Donald Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, have seized on that fact to basically say, look, this is proof of no collusion. However, we don't know what we don't know. And there are certainly additional shoes that could drop going down the road. It's impossible to rule out any additional developments."

++SEPARATED BY WHITE FLASH++

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Eric Tucker, AP Reporter:

"President Trump is supposed to meet with Vladimir Putin on Monday so this indictment comes just three days before that meeting. It also comes as the president is currently in England, where he is going to be having meetings with the royal family. So this is certainly not a development that the president wants to have to deal with as he's trying to have these foreign meetings, including with Vladimir Putin. One thing he has said is that of course he's going to bring up the Russian hacking with Putin, although he has said: 'what do you expect him (Putin) to say, do you expect him to effectively admit guilt or say that he did it?' But it is important to note that, contrary to Putin's assertions, this indictment does allege that these 12 people actually worked for a Russian intelligence agency. So they are an arm of the Russian government. So it becomes increasingly impossible, if this is proven then in court or established by the government somehow, that that these are the people who responsible for the hack to say that the Kremlin, that the Russian government had no part in this - that that is belied by the allegations in this indictment."