Russian lawyer says Trump son offered to return to issue of sanctions law: Bloomberg

 

FILE PHOTO - Donald Trump Jr. stands onstage with his father Republican U.S. presidential nominee Donald Trump after Trump's debate against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York, U.S. on September 26, 2016. REUTERS/Brian Snyder/File Photo

 

MOSCOW (Reuters) - A Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr. during the 2016 election campaign said the U.S. president's son told her his father, if elected, could return to the issue of a U.S. law which imposes sanctions on Russian officials related to the death of a Russian lawyer, Bloomberg reported.

 

New York attorney Alan Futerfas, who represents Donald Trump Jr., did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A representative for the Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, did not answer calls seeking comment. 

 

The June 2016 meeting in New York between Veselnitskaya and Donald Trump Jr, along with other senior Trump campaign officials, has become part of an investigation into allegations Russia interfered in the U.S. presidential election. Trump has denied his campaign colluded with Moscow.

 

Bloomberg quoted Veselnitskaya as saying in an interview in Moscow that she was lobbying against the so-called Magnitsky law, adopted by Washington in response to the 2009 death of Sergei Magnitsky, a whistle-blowing lawyer and auditor.

 

Supporters of Magnitsky say the Russian state murdered him by denying him adequate medical care while he was in prison on tax evasion charges. The Kremlin denies the allegation. 

 

In the interview with Bloomberg, Veselnitskaya quoted Donald Trump Jr as saying during their meeting, in reference to the Magnitsky law: "Looking ahead, if we come to power, we can return to this issue and think what to do about it.”

 

According to Bloomberg, Veselnitskaya also recalled the future president's son as saying: “I understand our side may have messed up, but it’ll take a long time to get to the bottom of it.”

 

Veselnitskaya said that at their meeting she offered to pass on information pertaining to alleged tax evasion by wealthy Democratic Party donors. She said Trump Jr. Had asked for documents proving the tax evasion, that she did not have any such documents and described the 20 minute meeting as a failure.

 

(Reporting by Katya Golubkova in Moscow and Karen Freifeld in New York)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-07

 

Hmmm.....sure sounds like illegal activity to me. Implicit promise to change US laws if Russia provides campaign info damaging to Clinton. Get that pardon pen ready Dad...

22 minutes ago, tonray said:

Hmmm.....sure sounds like illegal activity to me. Implicit promise to change US laws if Russia provides campaign info damaging to Clinton. Get that pardon pen ready Dad...

I was just going to ask the question- if this is true isn't this potentially explosive? Wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment?

11 minutes ago, midas said:

I was just going to ask the question- if this is true isn't this potentially explosive? Wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment?

The problem with impeachment is 1) It has to be proven the Donald Sr. put him up to it and 2) Only Congress can decide when to start impeachment and we know the spineless slugs in control now will never do it.

 

The real bottom line is sobering...no matter what Mueller finds....Trump can pardon everyone and Congress could decide not to impeach and Trump can be re-elected in 2020...no matter how bad !

 

Our system needs reform....badly

Edited November 7, 20178 yr by tonray

9 minutes ago, midas said:

I was just going to ask the question- if this is true isn't this potentially explosive? Wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment?

Have to prove Trump was involved.  So far, that's not been shown....so far....

Seems the Republicans are trying to get Muller ousted.  Politics at it's worst.

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-introduce-bill-to-remove-bob-mueller-from-special-counsel-2017-11

 

Republicans just introduced a resolution to remove Mueller from the Trump-Russia investigation

Reps. Matt Gaetz of Florida, Andy Biggs of Arizona, and Louie Gohmert of Texas say Mueller should step down because he was the FBI director in 2010 when US government agencies approved the sale of Uranium One, a Canadian energy company, to a Russian nuclear-energy firm. The deal required approval because Uranium One had mining operations in the US.

Anyone from team trump not involved with these russians??

 

Seeing all the anguish and beyond hopeful stances here it's fortunate cooler heads are in power. This Russophobia stemming from the swamp dweller's electoral thrashing is getting more and more desperate. I'm not sure how the Democrat supporters propose to normalize relations between Russian and the US after this hilarious witch-hunt has been finally called off. If the crazy accusations keep escalating it does not bode well for world peace, never mind trade and human rights interests - you might well end up causing a hot war and still have no smoking gun for the so called collusion. It's collective madness gone mad. Kudos to Trump and team for keeping cool and letting the kids blow off steam without a crackdown - which I will admit must be very tempting.

23 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Seeing all the anguish and beyond hopeful stances here it's fortunate cooler heads are in power. This Russophobia stemming from the swamp dweller's electoral thrashing is getting more and more desperate. I'm not sure how the Democrat supporters propose to normalize relations between Russian and the US after this hilarious witch-hunt has been finally called off. If the crazy accusations keep escalating it does not bode well for world peace, never mind trade and human rights interests - you might well end up causing a hot war and still have no smoking gun for the so called collusion. It's collective madness gone mad. Kudos to Trump and team for keeping cool and letting the kids blow off steam without a crackdown - which I will admit must be very tempting.

Wow.  You need better news sources.  Stay away from Breitbart, Fox and Infowars. LOL.

 

It's not a witch hunt and it won't be called off.  Place the blame properly.  It all boils down to the man in charge...Trump.  All those already indicted reported to Trump.  Nobody else.  And many more to come....as Mueller has already said.

52 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Seeing all the anguish and beyond hopeful stances here it's fortunate cooler heads are in power. This Russophobia stemming from the swamp dweller's electoral thrashing is getting more and more desperate. I'm not sure how the Democrat supporters propose to normalize relations between Russian and the US after this hilarious witch-hunt has been finally called off. If the crazy accusations keep escalating it does not bode well for world peace, never mind trade and human rights interests - you might well end up causing a hot war and still have no smoking gun for the so called collusion. It's collective madness gone mad. Kudos to Trump and team for keeping cool and letting the kids blow off steam without a crackdown - which I will admit must be very tempting.

You set a very very very low bar for "keeping cool."

Trump Demands the Prosecution of His Defeated Rival

Even as he admits he’s not supposed to interfere with the Justice Department, the president just can’t help himself.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/trump-justice-department-clinton/544928/

 

 

Raging Trump demands FBI investigate Clinton, uranium – anything but Russia

The president seized on claims in former chair Donna Brazile’s book about DNC bias in the Democratic primary to try to interfere in bureau’s independence

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/03/trump-fbi-clinton-russia-donna-brazile

Corleone

Off-topic post and reply reported and removed.   The topic isn't about news sources.  

sounds like we are going down another russia 'fact based' piece of journalism  Rabbit Hole once again...   from greenwald and poitras, who sprung edward snowden, and their site 'the intercept'... seriously, we know these people are not lovers of the executive branch of the usa...

 

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/

 

how about waiting for facts? isn't that the rule of ethics to be embraced? 

21 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

sounds like we are going down another russia 'fact based' piece of journalism  Rabbit Hole once again...   from greenwald and poitras, who sprung edward snowden, and their site 'the intercept'... seriously, we know these people are not lovers of the executive branch of the usa...

 

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/

 

how about waiting for facts? isn't that the rule of ethics to be embraced? 

 

How about go to the source?  This is Greenwald's opinion piece.  With loaded, sensational words.  Stuff some tend to gravitate towards.  How about go to the original report.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/09/22/wisconsin-one-20-states-targeted-russian-hacking-elections-systems-2016/694719001/

 

Luckily, nobody other than conspiracy theorists, doubt Russia did the hacks.  That's been well proven.

So, all the Russians lied about everything UNTIL 1 made claims to have had a 20 minute meeting with Trump Jr. where Russian sanctions were discussed as well as dirt digging on Clinton. Quite the huge spectrum of topics for a 20 minute meeting that the same Russian labeled as a failure.

It takes more than 20 minutes for a congressman or senator to discuss what to have for lunch that day. Grasping at straws again. 

1 minute ago, mrwebb8825 said:

So, all the Russians lied about everything UNTIL 1 made claims to have had a 20 minute meeting with Trump Jr. where Russian sanctions were discussed as well as dirt digging on Clinton. Quite the huge spectrum of topics for a 20 minute meeting that the same Russian labeled as a failure.

It takes more than 20 minutes for a congressman or senator to discuss what to have for lunch that day. Grasping at straws again. 

Donald Trump 'weighed in' on son's Russia lawyer statement 'like any father would do', White House says

The White House said on Tuesday that US President Donald Trump had a role in producing a statement in which his son denied that a meeting he had with a Russian lawyer was related to the 2016 presidential campaign.

The comments were later shown to be misleading.

Sarah Sanders, White House spokesman, told a briefing that Trump "certainly didn't dictate (the statement), but ... he weighed in, offered a suggestion like any father would do."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/01/donald-trump-dictated-misleading-statement-sons-meeting-russian/