Latest News on Donald Trump Jr. Sparks A Trump Tweet Rant About the “Witch Hunt”

The president responds to the “failing and crooked” New York Times’ “boring” scoop

Evan Vucci/AP

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

On Saturday, the New York Times reported that Donald Trump Jr. took a second, previously undisclosed meeting during the 2016 presidential election to discuss an overture from a foreign government—this time with an emissary from princes in the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

It’s a pretty damning story, at first glance. But on Sunday President Donald Trump offered alternative read on it—it actually vindicates him, because the disclosure of the meeting meant that special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the election had gone nowhere.

The story never actually says that, because that doesn’t make any sense. Mueller’s probe has already indicted 19 people—including 13 Russian nationals—and wrung a guilty plea from the president’s first national security adviser. His campaign manager has been indicted. And the Times story notes that Mueller was investigating this second meeting specifically to see if it, too, had been coordinated in some way with the Russians.

As is often the case, Trump opted to deflect from the contents of the story by calling for his political critics to be investigated instead:

 

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest