Nancy Pelosi Says Trump Jr. Et Al. May Be Complicit in Espionage

“The law was violated,” House Minority Leader insists.

Nancy Pelosi, center, with other Democratic congresswomen at a June press conference denouncing President Trump's derogatory tweets about women.

Nancy Pelosi, center, with other Democratic congresswomen at a June press conference denouncing President Trump's derogatory tweets about women.Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Did House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi just accuse Donald Trump’s son, son-in-law, and former campaign manager of complicity in espionage? Maybe.

At a press conference Friday, the California Democrat read a list of crimes for which legal experts have said Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort could potentially be prosecuted as a result of their June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer. They hoped to receive damaging information—courtesy of the Russian government—about Hillary Clinton. Pelosi spoke to reporters just as the news broke that Rinat Akhmetshin, a DC-based lobbyist for Russian interests, had also attended the Trump Tower meeting. Akhmetshin has denied reports claiming he’s a former Russian counterintelligence officer.

“This is a campaign violation: soliciting, coordinating, or accepting something of value—opposition research, documents, and information—from a foreign government of foreign national,” Pelosi said, reading from notes. “Plain and simple.”

She went on to list potential charges without providing further context: “Criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States, impeding the lawful administration of a federal election or to make an offense against the United States, cybercrime, hacking against US citizens—the Clinton campaign.”

“Conspiracy with respect to espionage, depending on whether information was obtained through Russian spying and the level of their awareness of the spying,” Pelosi continued. “When I say ‘their,’ I mean Trump, Kushner, Manafort etc.”

So was she charging that Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort violated those laws—or saying they might have? I asked Pelosi this.

“Yes,” she replied. But despite several follow-up questions, she never quite clarified her meaning. “There is very serious reason to believe that these people violated the law,” she said later.

Her remarks were part of a news conference in which Democrats from various House committees detailed steps aimed at pressuring House Republicans to investigate Trump more aggressively. These include a procedural move, a “resolution of inquiry,” by which the Democrats intend to force a vote on a request that Attorney General Jeff Sessions disclose information about his meetings last year with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak—among other matters.

Republicans are sure to vote down the resolution, but Democrats hope it will call attention to their rivals’ reluctance to investigate the administration. “Republicans in Congress have become enablers of the Trump-Russia assault on our democracy,” Pelosi said.

Pelosi has urged Democrats calling for Trump’s impeachment to “curb their enthusiasm.” But with Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) a vocal impeachment advocate, standing behind her on Friday, Pelosi seemed to edge toward Waters’ position. “We need to follow the facts,” she said. “What did the rest of the Trump family know and when did they know it?”

“I have always been reluctant, because I think impeachment has always been something that has an impact on the country,” she said. “So when the facts are clear—the law is certainly clear—then this Congress will make a decision in that regard.”

As she left the event, Pelosi was asked by reporters to specify which laws she believed the Trump campaign trio had broken. “I said the law was violated,” she answered before her aides hustled her away.

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate