With the indictment of longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone last week, the investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller of the Russian government’s interference into the 2016 presidential election may be nearing a finish.

Mueller charged that Stone lied about coordinating with WikiLeaks on the organization’s release of thousands of emails stolen from the Hillary Clinton campaign by Russian operatives.

Mueller’s final report is anticipated soon.

Will Mueller allege a widespread conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s government to rig the 2016 election in Trump’s favor?

Or, will the final report simply conclude what we already know; that Trump campaign officials lied to Mueller and Congress to conceal their Russian connections and avoid a devastating political embarrassment to Trump? That’s obstruction of justice.

Either conclusion will trigger finger pointing as political spinmeisters seek to assign or deflect blame. Impeachment fever will spike among some Democrats. Tribal loyalists to the president will shift into overdrive defending their hero.

But if all we do is retreat to our polarized corners, assign blame, and extract political vengeance, the country will be missing an opportunity.

In a broader sense, the Mueller report will be an essay on the corruption of the American electoral system. The report should sound an alarm to the national security threat that has disrupted our cherished institution of free elections.

There was much more wrong with the 2016 presidential cycle than Russian tampering. Putin’s cyber success was only the most outrageous example of special-interest funded dark money manipulating elections, purchasing political parties and engineering propaganda campaigns.

The seeds of the weeds that now choke our politics were planted in 1944 when the first political action committee (PAC) was formed by the Congress of Industrial Organizations to raise funds for Franklin Roosevelt’s re-election. Hundreds of similar PACs soon were operating.

Congress tried weed control — the Federal Election Campaign Act in 1971 regulated outside campaign money and set limits on the contributions of individuals, unions or corporations. An organization becomes a PAC when it spends more than $2,600 to influence an election. A loophole in the legislation allowed PACS to collect small sums from large numbers of people.

PACs multiplied from 600 groups in the 1970s to more than 4,000 by 2010. The result was a massive increase in money spent on election campaigns.

The weeds took full control of the election garden when Citizens United, a conservative political action group, sued the Federal Election Commission over its restrictions on organizations making “electioneering communication.” Citizens United had sought to release a film critical of Hillary Clinton in the 2008 presidential primary. The Supreme Court sided with Citizens United in 2010.

The court could have, and should have, chosen a narrow ruling focusing on the law as it concerned the politically motivated documentary. Instead it issued a broad directive that corporations have a “free speech” constitutional right to promote a political agenda. In the process the court undermined laws that sought to limit the ability of big money to influence our elections.

The ruling sparked the creation of Super PACS. Super PACS may not contribute to candidates or parties. However, corporations or unions that form Super PACs may make unlimited expenditures to advocate political issues and, indirectly, candidates.

The Citizens ruling prompted the rise of “dark money” groups that do not disclose the identity of the donors. These tax-exempt advocacy groups can accept unlimited contributions from any source, and may contribute unlimited amounts to a Super PAC.

In 2016, an astonishing $6.5 billion was spent on American political campaigns; $2.4 billion on presidential campaigns; another $4 billion on congressional and state races. Of that total, $1.4 billion came from 2,395 Super PACS or dark money sources.

Campaign spending escalated again in the 2018 mid-term elections when a record-setting $5.2 billion was spent on congressional and state races. Of that, $1.1 billion came from Super PACS and dark money.

In this cesspool of dark-money campaign skullduggery Putin and his Russian cyber warriors found an opportunity to attack the United States. The Mueller report will have much to say on whether Donald Trump was a witting or unwitting participant in Putin’s wildly successful gambit. But the Mueller report also should serve as a clarion call to reform our election financing process.

Future candidates would be wise to de-emphasize donations from special interest groups in favor of individual contributions. Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders proved that significant dollars can come from enthusiastic individuals.

Additionally, Congress should pass legislation that demands transparency by identifying all political donors and the amounts they contribute.

From this intensely troubling national trauma, perhaps we can learn, correct course, and advance.

The Day editorial board meets with political, business and community leaders to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Timothy Dwyer, Executive Editor Izaskun E. Larraneta, Owen Poole, copy editor, and Lisa McGinley, retired deputy managing editor. The board operates independently from The Day newsroom.