From the "Press Briefing by Press Secretary Sean Spicer, 2/14/2017, #12" (starting at 15:23 of the ABC News video):
JONATHAN KARL: Back in January, the President said that nobody in his campaign had been in touch with the Russians. Now, today, can you still say definitively that nobody on the Trump campaign, not even General Flynn, had any contact with the Russians before the election?
SEAN SPICER: My understanding is that what General Flynn has now expressed is that during the transition period — well, we were very clear that during the transition period, he did fee- he did speak with the ambassador —
JONATHAN KARL: I’m talking about during the campaign.
MR. SPICER: I don’t have any- I- there’s nothing that would conclude me that anything different has changed with respect to that time period.
Many English verbs that express a change of state — known as inchoative verbs — can also be used as causatives, when something causes that change of state. Thus
The ice melted. ↔ The sun melted the ice.
The water boiled. ↔ Kim boiled the water.
The rock disintegrated. ↔ The impact disintegrated the rock.
A large number of other inchoative verbs also have causative versions — freeze, break, open, close, change, sink, float, etc.
There are some inchoatives that lack a causative version, or developed a causative version as a relatively recent innovation. An example is disappear, whose common causative version seems to have developed in the 1970s, in response to events in Latin America, to mean (in the OED's gloss) "To abduct or arrest (a person), esp. for political reasons, and subsequently to kill or detain as a prisoner, without making his or her fate known".
But most English inchoative "propositional attitude" verbs — describing a change of mental state with respect to some proposition — don't have standard causative versions. Thus
We realized that it was getting late.
*The darkness realized us that it was getting late.
They learned that the show was cancelled.
*The doorman learned them that the show was cancelled.
She inferred that he had packed for a long trip.
*A search of his closet inferred her that he had packed for a long trip.
So I was struck by Mr. Spicer's causative use of conclude:
There’s nothing that would conclude me that anything different has changed with respect to that time period.
Presumably this was just a speech error, though it's one of those interesting errors that result from over-generalizing a quasi-regular pattern, just as children and second-language learners often do.
A quick web search finds a fair number of uses of this construction, but most if not all of them seem to be from non-native speakers, e.g.:
My experiments with MT imaging conclude me that, on average, it can image disks faster using fast compression than with-out.
From the evidences of the research and the theory of First Language Acquisition, these conclude me that Veronica is in two-word stage of child first learning acquisition because often she sounds two words even some word not clear, understand plural grammar.
But her rude behavior confirmed and conclude me that she has an attitude and hatred against Muslim Malays as she is Indian Race Malaysian Citizen whom mostly preferred to work in Singapore taking / snaping away local jobs to foreigner like her and her associates
You just conclude me that I cannot understand intl fans' minds. I'm Korean but that doesn't mean I can see Exo.
Still, it's possible that Mr. Spicer's usage is evidence of an unexpected dimension of micro-syntactic variation in North American English. We'll keep an eye on it.
Update — Mr. Spicer's remark has been widely construed as a negative response to Jonathan Karl's question, e.g. in "Trump campaign aides had repeated contacts with Russian Intelligence", NYT 2/14/2017:
The F.B.I. declined to comment. The White House also declined to comment Tuesday night, but earlier in the day, the press secretary, Sean Spicer, stood by Mr. Trump’s previous comments that nobody from his campaign had contact with Russian officials before the election.
“There’s nothing that would conclude me that anything different has changed with respect to that time period,” Mr. Spicer said in response to a question.
But that interpretation requires several steps of approximate reasoning that are probably not warranted in the context.