Senate Republicans Really, Really Don’t Want to Talk About Trump Jr.

No really.

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom via ZUMA

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

Donald Trump Jr. provided some fire to go with all the smoke over possible Trump campaign collusion with Russia, but Senate Republicans aren’t rushing to the alarms.

With his hand forced by the New York Times, Tuesday morning President Trump’s eldest son released emails showing that he enthusiastically sought help from the Russian government in obtaining information he hoped would be damaging to Hillary Clinton. The bombshell contradicted months of denials by the president and his surrogates that his campaign communicated with Russians as part of a coordinated effort to defeat Clinton, and also junked a longstanding claim by Trump backers that there is zero evidence of collusion between the parties in question.

Instead of outrage, though, GOP senators communicated a clear desire to avoid opining on the revelations.

In his weekly pen and pad session with reporters, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) declined to comment on the Donald Jr. news, beyond asserting confidence that the Senate Intelligence Committee will “get to bottom of it.”

Earlier Tuesday, that committee’s chairman, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), was asked if his panel will in fact “get to the bottom of this.” Burr’s response was a bit more qualified, telling reporters, “We said we were going to get to the bottom of the investigation.”

Burr also warned against “forming a conclusion based on one email release.”

Even some of the president’s least stalwart GOP allies seemed keen to avoid judgement. “I haven’t read the emails,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters. “I don’t know [much] other than what’s been reported in the press. I imagine the Intelligence Committee will look at that as part of an overall process.”

Responding to a question about whether or not the emails show an effort to collude with the Kremlin, Rubio sidestepped. “That’s something Mr. Mueller will have to determine,” he said, referencing Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his Justice Department investigation into Russian interference. 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who heads a Senate Judiciary subcommittee that has looked into issues related to Russian election meddling, called it “problematic” that Trump Jr., the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and former campaign chief Paul Manafort attended a Trump Tower meeting with a Kremlin-connected lawyer who was supposedly going to provide dirt on Clinton. But Graham noted it did not appear that the Trump campaign actually received Russian aid as a result of this meeting. According to US intelligence agencies, of course, the Russians did provide assistance after the meeting, by releasing embarrassing emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.

Asked by Mother Jones if that was a coincidence, Graham responded, “I don’t know. I know that lady didn’t help them.”

Meanwhile, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a Senate Intelligence Committee member who has previously pressed fellow Republicans to investigate Russian meddling more aggressively, struck a similar note. Collins said “it would premature to judge” whether the Trump campaign tried to collude, but that the committee should interview Trump Jr. and others involved in the Trump Tower meeting. “We’re still in the early stages of this investigation,” Collins said.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), meanwhile, tried to completely avoid the topic. Corker was eager to discuss the progress of legislation he’s been pushing that would impose new sanctions on Russia for interfering in US politics, and he suggested the new evidence of Moscow’s activities in the 2016 election were an unsubstantial matter outside his lane. “Talk to others about politics,” Corker said. “Talk to me about policy.” 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

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