A Russian lawyer who met with President Donald Trump’s oldest son last year says he indicated that a law targeting Russia could be re-examined if his father won the election and asked her for written evidence that illegal proceeds went to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
That, my friends, would be a quid pro quo.
“Looking ahead, if we come to power, we can return to this issue and think what to do about it,’’ Trump Jr. said of the 2012 law, she recalled. “I understand our side may have messed up, but it’ll take a long time to get to the bottom of it,” he added, according to her.
Veselnitskaya also said Trump Jr. requested financial documents showing that money that allegedly evaded U.S. taxes had gone to Clinton’s campaign. She didn’t have any and described the 20-minute meeting as a failure.
Veselnitskaya was trying to sell Trump, Jr. on proof that Democratic donors had paid no taxes on money they’d earned in Russia. She didn’t have any proof with her, so everybody left disappointed, but the willingness of Trump campaign people to have the meeting alone is viewed by many as willingness to collude. A functional and ethical campaign would have called the FBI instead of having the meeting.
If Trump Jr. actually said that. as Josh Marshall says:
Even if you assume it is true, there’s no reason for Veselnitskaya to say it. No one is forcing her to say anything, certainly no legal authority in the United States. So whether it’s true or not almost seems beside the point. The real significance is that she’s suggesting something highly, highly damaging…
Remember, this is what made DOJ officials believe Mike Flynn was such a risk. He was publicly lying and his Russian contacts could prove he was lying, thus making him vulnerable to blackmail. Don Jr. seems to be in the same spot.
As the Old Jew (Papa Polislice) would say “from your mouth to God’s ear”.
The Polislice 