Special counsel Robert Mueller
Robert (Bob) MuellerSenate Democrats urge Garland not to fight court order to release Trump obstruction memo Why a special counsel is guaranteed if Biden chooses Yates, Cuomo or Jones as AG Barr taps attorney investigating Russia probe origins as special counsel MORE considered charging Trump campaign officials with a campaign finance violation over the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer, but did not think he had sufficient evidence.
Mueller’s report, released Thursday, says investigators believed that the offer of political “dirt” on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton
Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonTrump criticizes Justice for restoring McCabe's benefits Biden sends 'best wishes' to Clinton following hospitalization The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Altria - Jan. 6 panel flexes its muscle MORE could be a violation of a ban on campaign contributions from a foreign government.
That federal statute also applies to “'an express or implied promise to make a [foreign-source] contribution,'" and that the promise of damaging information meant to help Trump could be considered a “'thing of value'” under the ban, Mueller wrote.
And the presence at the meeting of officials like former campaign chairman Paul Manafort
Paul John ManafortDOJ investigating one-time Trump campaign adviser over alleged ties to Qatar: report Foreign lobbyists donated over M during 2020 election: report Former Mueller prosecutor representing Donoghue in congressional probes: report MORE and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner
Jared Corey KushnerHillicon Valley — Presented by LookingGlass — Hackers are making big money Kushner associate pardoned by Trump in plea discussions over cyberstalking charges Biden has an opportunity to put his own stamp on Arab-Israeli relations MORE, who's now a senior White House adviser, signals that the campaign was hoping to benefit from that information, according to Mueller’s report.
“The communications setting up the meeting and the attendance by high-level Campaign representatives support an inference that the Campaign anticipated receiving derogatory documents and information from official Russian sources that could assist candidate Trump's electoral prospects,” the report says.
British publicist Rob Goldstone had reached out to Donald Trump Jr.
Don TrumpHow Trump uses fundraising emails to remain undisputed leader of the GOP Donald Trump Jr. joins Cameo Book claims Trump family members were 'inappropriately' close with Secret Service agents MORE, the president's eldest son, to set up the meeting during the 2016 campaign. Goldstone wrote in emails that Russia had "'official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to [Trump Jr.'s] father,'” as "part of Russia and its government's support to Mr. Trump.'”
“[I]f it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer,” Trump Jr. replied.
“Trump Jr. appears to have accepted that offer and to have arranged a meeting to receive those materials,” Mueller wrote in his report. “Documentary evidence in the form of email chains supports the inference that Kushner and Manafort were aware of that purpose and attended the June 9 meeting anticipating the receipt of helpful information to the Campaign from Russian sources.”
However, the special counsel’s office “did not obtain admissible evidence” that could show to legal standards that the campaign officials knew that the action was illegal, according to the report.
Mueller's team also believed it would probably have difficulty proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the value of the promised political dirt would exceed “the threshold for a criminal violation.”
“The investigation has not developed evidence that the participants in the meeting were familiar with the foreign-contribution ban” or the federal law applying to the meeting, and “does not have strong evidence of surreptitious behavior or efforts at concealment at the time of the June 9 meeting,” the report states.
News of the Trump Tower meeting, first revealed by The New York Times in 2017, drew immediate backlash from Democrats, who argued it was evidence of connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Mueller concluded in his report that they investigators found "no documentary evidence" that Trump had prior knowledge of the June 2016 meeting.
