January 3, 2018

Sen. Feinstein Says Trump’s Social-Media Guru “May Have Corresponded With Russian Nationals”

The ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee has requested interviews with Dan Scavino and Brad Parscale.

White House Director of Social Media and Assistant to the President Dan Scavino Jr. shows a message on his iPhone to White House Chief of Staff John Kelly as United States President Donald J. Trump tours the US Secret Service James J. Rowley Training Center in Beltsville, Maryland on Friday, October 13, 2017.Ron Sachs/CNP via ZUMA Wire

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

President Donald Trump’s social-media manager, Dan Scavino, “may have corresponded with Russian nationals regarding Trump campaign social media efforts,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) wrote Wednesday in a letter asking Scavino to agree to an interview this month with the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Feinstein’s letter says the committee, where she is the ranking Democrat, has “received information” regarding Scavino’s potential communications with Russians. The California senator did not elaborate.

During the now infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting where Donald Trump Jr. hoped to obtain damaging information on Hillary Clinton from a Russia lawyer, Rob Goldstone, the British publicist who helped arrange the sit-down, reportedly suggested that the Trump campaign create a page on a Russian social-media site to connect with Russian Americans. After the meeting, Goldstone emailed Scavino, who was not at the meeting, to press him to pursue the idea, CNN reported. A Feinstein spokesman did not respond to questions about whether Goldstone’s suggestion or other information formed the basis for the claim in her letter.

Scavino, a former golf caddie of Trump’s who acts as a vociferous and aggressive alter ego for the president on Twitter, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Feinstein also sent a letter Wednesday to Brad Parscale, who oversaw the Trump campaign’s digital operation, asking him to agree to an interview and turn over any documents he has related to contacts with Russian nationals or groups such as WikiLeaks.

The letters cite the US intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump, in part through social-media messaging. Trump campaign officials, including Parscale, have denied allegations that they shared campaign data with Russian officials to help them effectively target social-media messages.

In an October 2017 interview on CBS’ 60 Minutes, Parscale said any allegation he was involved in collusion is “a joke.” In a November letter responding to an inquiry by House Democrats, Parscale said, “I do not have any firsthand knowledge of foreign interference in the 2016 election.” Parscale has not said whether he knew of other Trump campaign officials communicating with foreign nationals. But in an email last month to Mother Jones, he argued he had fully addressed the matter. “I have said it on Fox News, 60 Minutes, Twitter, etc.,” he wrote. “Not sure how many more times I can make it clear.” Parscale did not respond to an email Wednesday.

The letters are the latest in a slew of Russia-related inquiries that Feinstein has sent over the last few months without the cooperation of the Judiciary Committee’s chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Grassley and Feinstein have conducted mostly separate investigations since October, when their previously bipartisan probe fractured over Feinstein’s complaint that Grassley was overly focused on investigations of Hillary Clinton and the Obama Justice Department. Democrats argue those inquiries are attempts to distract from the Trump campaign’s suspected collaboration with Russia. Without Grassley, Feinstein lacks subpoena power, leaving her reliant on voluntary cooperation.



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