Review the provided text, an excerpt from a report on a government investigation. Redact information that identifies the purpose and scope of the investigation, who was involved with it, and where and when it was conducted. That there was an investigation and that the excerpt is from a report about it is all that one should be able to conclude from reading the text. Format your redactions as "[REDACTED]".

On December 21, 2020, the Attorney General delegated certain authority to use classified
information to the Special Counsel.

After the inauguration of President Biden, Attorney General Garland met with the Office
of Special Counsel ("OSC" or "the Office"). The Office very much appreciates the support,
consistent with his testimony during his confirmation hearings, that the Attorney General has
provided to our efforts and the Department's willingness to allow us to operate independently.

The Special Counsel structured the investigation in view of his power and authority "to
exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney." Like a
U.S. Attorney's Office, the Special Counsel's Office considered in the course of its investigation
a range of classified and unclassified information available to the FBI and other government
agencies. A substantial amount of information and evidence was immediately available to the
Office at the inception of the investigation as a result of numerous congressional investigations
and Special Counsel Mueller's investigation. The examinations by the Office of the Inspector
General ("OIG") of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act ("FISA") applications targeting Carter Page, and other matters provided additional evidence
and information, as did an internal report prepared by the FBI's Inspection Division. The
Office reviewed the intelligence, counterintelligence, and law-enforcement activities directed at
the 2016 Trump campaign and individuals associated either with the campaign or with the
Trump administration in its early stages. The Office structured its work around evidence for
possible use in prosecutions of federal crimes (assuming that one or more crimes were identified
that warranted prosecution). The Office exercised its judgment regarding what to investigate but
did not investigate every public report of an alleged violation of law in connection with the
intelligence and law enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns.

In addition to the Special Counsel, the Office has been staffed by experienced FBI and
Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division Agents; Department attorneys and
prosecutors; support personnel; and contractor employees.

The Office's investigation was broad and extensive. It included investigative work both
domestically and overseas. It entailed obtaining large document productions from businesses,
firms, government agencies, universities, political campaigns, internet service providers,
telephone companies, and individuals. The Office interviewed hundreds of individuals, many on
multiple occasions. The Office conducted the majority of interviews in classified settings; for
some interviewees and their counsel security clearances needed to be obtained. The Office
conducted interviews in person and via video link, with the vast majority of the latter occurring
after the COVID-19 pandemic-related closures began in March 2020. Although a substantial
majority of individuals voluntarily cooperated with the Office, some only provided information
under a subpoena or grant of immunity. Some individuals who, in our view, had important and
relevant information about the topics under investigation refused to be interviewed or otherwise
cooperate with the Office. As of April 2023, with two trials completed, the Office has conducted
more than 480 interviews; obtained and reviewed more than one million documents consisting of
more than six million pages; served more than 190 subpoenas under the auspices of grand juries;
executed seven search warrants; obtained five orders for communications records under 18
U.S.C. § 2703(d); and made one request to a foreign government under a Mutual Legal
Assistance Treaty.

The Office would like to express its appreciation to, among others, the FBI's Office of
General Counsel ("OGC") and Inspection Division; the Litigation Technology Support
Services Unit in the National Security Division ("NSD"); the eDiscovery Team in the Office of
the Chief Information Officer of the Justice Management Division ("JMD"); and JMD's Service
Delivery Staff. The NSD and JMD entities created and maintained the databases and technology
infrastructure needed to organize and review the large amount of data we obtained. The Office
would also like to express its appreciation to the Department's Office of Privacy and Civil
Liberties for its guidance on appropriate information to include in a public report.
On [REDACTED], [REDACTED] delegated certain authority to use [REDACTED] to [REDACTED].

After [REDACTED], [REDACTED] met with [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] very much appreciates the support, consistent with [REDACTED], that [REDACTED] has provided to our efforts and [REDACTED]'s willingness to allow us to operate independently.

[REDACTED] structured the investigation in view of his power and authority "to exercise all investigative [REDACTED] functions of [REDACTED]." Like a [REDACTED], [REDACTED] considered in the course of its investigation a range of [REDACTED] available to [REDACTED] and other [REDACTED]. A substantial amount of information and evidence was immediately available to [REDACTED] at the inception of the investigation as a result of numerous [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]. The examinations by [REDACTED] of [REDACTED], the [REDACTED], and other matters provided additional evidence and information, as did an internal report prepared by [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] reviewed the [REDACTED] directed at [REDACTED] and individuals associated either with [REDACTED] or with the [REDACTED] in its early stages. [REDACTED] structured its work around evidence for possible use in [REDACTED] (assuming that one or more [REDACTED] were identified that warranted [REDACTED]). [REDACTED] exercised its judgment regarding what to investigate but did not investigate every public report of an alleged [REDACTED] in connection with the [REDACTED] directed at the [REDACTED].

In addition to [REDACTED], [REDACTED] has been staffed by experienced [REDACTED]; [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]; [REDACTED]; and [REDACTED].

[REDACTED]'s investigation was [REDACTED]. It included investigative work both [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]. It entailed obtaining [REDACTED] from [REDACTED], [REDACTED], [REDACTED], [REDACTED], [REDACTED], [REDACTED], [REDACTED], and [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] interviewed [REDACTED], many on multiple occasions. [REDACTED] conducted the majority of interviews in [REDACTED]; for some interviewees [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] conducted interviews [REDACTED], with the vast majority of the latter occurring after [REDACTED] began in [REDACTED]. Although a substantial majority of [REDACTED] with [REDACTED], some only provided information [REDACTED]. Some individuals who, in our view, had important and relevant information about the topics under investigation refused to be interviewed or otherwise cooperate with [REDACTED]. As of [REDACTED], with [REDACTED] completed, [REDACTED] has conducted [REDACTED] interviews; obtained and reviewed [REDACTED] documents consisting of [REDACTED] pages; [REDACTED]; [REDACTED]; [REDACTED]; and made [REDACTED].

[REDACTED] would like to express its appreciation to, among others, [REDACTED]; [REDACTED]; [REDACTED]; and [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] created and maintained the [REDACTED] needed to organize and review [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] would also like to express its appreciation to [REDACTED] for its guidance on [REDACTED].