Trump’s son navigates the turbulent waters of crime by the Russian plot

0
217

The president’s first-born, Donald Trump, was aware of Russia’s alleged attempts to benefit his father in the election and did not disclose them, which could demonstrate collusion with a foreign adversary and constitute an electoral offense capable of eroding the foundations of the presidency .

Donald Trump Jr. not only had no qualms but was “delighted” with the possibility that the Russian government wanted to help his father’s election victory, he told a friend with business ties to the Trump Organization and Moscow.

US intelligence agencies consider it proven that Moscow attempted to interfere with the electoral outcome by various means and with the new revelations seems to have also tried to sweeten up by offering secret scandals to the Trump campaign.

In June last year, Rob Goldstone, a British publicist who worked on the Moscow version of Miss Universe – one of Trump’s properties – wrote toxic lines in 2013: the Russian prosecutor general “offers to provide Trump’s campaign with Official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary (Clinton) in business with Russia and would be very useful to your father. ”

Donald Trump Jr., who himself revealed the e-mails he exchanged with Goldstone in the face of pressure from the publication of articles that incriminated him, replied: “If that’s how you say it, I’d be delighted, especially in late summer.”

Only those two parts of the exchange of messages prior to the meeting with a “Russian government lawyer” could become the first solid evidence of the collusion of Trump’s campaign with the Russian government to boycott Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s options.

Trump’s son, now in no public office, may have violated electoral laws prohibiting the “explicit or implicit” request for monetary or spousal compensation from a foreign government, even more so when he is considered an adversary.

Trump’s presidential adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and Trump’s campaign manager Paul Manafort were present at the June 9, 2016 meeting, revealed on Saturday by The New York Times. In short, the dome of the campaign.

Two days earlier, on the assumption that he would be proclaimed Republican presidential candidate, Trump made an announcement that today takes on a broader meaning: that he would make revelations about “the Clintons” with information “very, very interesting.”

Virginia Senator Mark Warner said it is “surprising that the meeting was not revealed earlier and that it is the first time the public has clear evidence that Trump’s campaign obtained information from a potential foreign agent to interfere with Hillary’s campaign Clinton. ”

The Common Sense organization today filed a formal complaint with the Justice Department and the Federal Electoral Commission (FEC) to investigate a potential breach of the election laws by the Trump campaign by having sought help from a foreign government in the form of ” Campaign research “.

Senator and Democratic Leader of the Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, declined to comment on whether what Trump’s son did was illegal, but said he was at least “irresponsible and immoral.”

Sen. Tim Kaine, who is also a Democratic senator and former vice president, said that the issue “is already going beyond the obstruction of justice” and is approaching perjury, since the president has repeatedly denied that he had any knowledge of the collaboration of his campaign with operatives Russians, something that is now out of the question.

Jen Psaki, a spokeswoman for the State Department during the previous administration, considered that although emails do not show direct collusion, they do indicate willingness to collaborate with Russia.

In the opinion of Georgetown University law professor Victoria Nourse, “the couriers are clear proof of the intent of the campaign to prepare to solicit support from a foreign government. Any field professional would have called the FBI.”

For his part, Trump Jr., who says he has published the messages to be “totally transparent”, has justified his performance with an exercise of sarcasm: “Obviously, I am the first person in a campaign who has ever had a meeting to listen to information Of an opponent “.

Leave a Reply