The revelation that Donald Trump Donald John TrumpUS reimposes UN sanctions on Iran amid increasing tensions Jeff Flake: Republicans 'should hold the same position' on SCOTUS vacancy as 2016 Trump supporters chant 'Fill that seat' at North Carolina rally MORE Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort attended a previously-undisclosed meeting in June 2016 with a Russian lawyer claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonJeff Flake: Republicans 'should hold the same position' on SCOTUS vacancy as 2016 Momentum growing among Republicans for Supreme Court vote before Election Day Warning signs flash for Lindsey Graham in South Carolina MORE represents bombshell news with ominous implications for the "Putingate" investigations.

The Trump associates at the meeting were offered an invitation to collude and coordinate with Russians in their campaign to defeat Clinton and elect Trump. They accepted that invitation.

ADVERTISEMENT

The three Trump associates should have declined to attend the meeting and informed the counterintelligence division of the FBI that the Russian offer was made. They did attend the meeting. They did not inform the FBI.

The Trump associates should have fully disclosed this meeting — and others — at the earliest opportunity on government forms involving dealings with foreign agents. They did not disclose this meeting or others when they should have. They should have told the full truth about them, at all times. They did not, many times.

The release Tuesday morning of the email chain preceding the meeting in June 2016 is explosive, as well as legally and politically treacherous for Trump and his associates. They were explicitly told in the emails that the alleged negative information about Clinton from Russia was very high level and was part of the plan by the Russian government to support Trump being elected president.

On this key point, the emails provide a smoking gun that as early as June 2016, there was a concerted plot by the Russians to attack Clinton and elect Trump. This should have been immediately reported to the FBI. It was not. It increases the legal and political danger to every American who attended the meeting and any other Trump associates who may have learned about it and never reported it, which will be a major and urgent topic of investigation.

This pattern of behavior would almost certainly be viewed by special counsel Robert Mueller as probative evidence that there was known coordination and collusion between Trump associates and Russians seeking to decide the outcome of the American election.

The pattern of behavior that began in June 2016 and continued through other meetings between Team Trump and Team Russia also probably creates major problems with the special counsel. Every meeting that was not properly disclosed on federal forms raises compounded legal issues with potential criminal liability for those who did not disclose them.

Repeated misrepresentations by various Trump associates regarding their meetings with Russians suggests what lawyers call "consciousness of guilt" that is probative evidence of potential crimes that would affect the decision of a special counsel about whether to bring charges. It would also affect the judgment of juries about whether to convict if charges are filed.

One of the most important and fascinating questions about the June 2016 meeting is whether the Feds knew about this meeting in the summer of 2016 and sought warrants to eavesdrop on Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner.

It is widely believed that the June 2016 meeting was only recently discovered. This may or may not be correct. If the Feds learned about this meeting during the summer of June 2016, they would not want it known, for counterintelligence reasons, that they knew, or that they sought warrants.

I have long suspected that by December 2016, warrants were sought and granted to monitor key Trump associates based on now-known meetings that Manafort, Kushner and others had with Russians. This may or may not have happened.

The latest bombshell about the June 2016 meetings makes the prospect of warrants more likely and brings the timeline for potential warrants to an earlier time frame in 2016. Could Trump have been partially right when he charged that Obama "tapped" him, except that the "tapping" would have been judicially approved?

This plot thickens.

Brent Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas) and former Chief Deputy Majority Whip Bill Alexander (D-Ark.). He holds an LL.M. degree in international financial law from the London School of Economics. He is a longtime regular columnist for The Hill and can be contacted at brentbbi@webtv.net.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.