Investigating whether Donald Trump’s meeting with executives from oil companies last month at Mar-a-Lago could result in legal action is a formidable watchdog organization that has led the charge in holding the president responsible for constitutional infractions.
In addition to requesting a $1 billion donation for his presidential campaign, Trump promised to lift Joe Biden’s limitations on oil drilling, natural gas export permits, and vehicle emissions.
Crew’s chief ethics counsel, Virginia Canter, stated that the organization’s attorneys were looking into what she described as a serious ethical concern. She stated, “We’re seriously investigating whether Trump’s $1 billion fundraising pitch to the oil executives would warrant some additional action.”
Canter went on to say that the contents of the conversation between the oil firms and the former president were concerning.
“This was a very focused small group directed at a particular industry, there was an amount put out there of $1bn, which he described as a deal, which all raises questions about the transactional nature of the meeting.”
The announcement of House Democrats’ own investigation into the Mar-a-Lago dinner coincided with the release of Crew’s investigation. Nine oil executives received letters on Monday from the House oversight committee requesting information about their businesses’ participation.
The senator from Rhode Island who chairs the Senate budget committee—which has the authority to issue subpoenas—Sheldon Whitehouse, is also thinking about opening an investigation.
He claimed in a statement to the Guardian that the request for campaign funds and Trump’s purported promise to lift fossil fuel limits on the first day of a second Trump administration amounted to a “blatant quid pro quo.”
“Pretty much an invitation to ask questions about big oil’s political corruption and manipulation,” according to Whitehouse, was the statement. In order to “ensure the industry cannot simply buy off politicians in order to saddle taxpayers with the bill,” he continued, his budget committee was investigating the matter.
Crew has a strong history of bringing Trump and his inner circle before ethics panels and the courts.
The group spearheaded the recent effort to remove Trump from the Colorado presidential ballot on the grounds that he had disregarded the US Supreme Court’s ruling prohibiting insurrectionary behavior in violation of the 14th Amendment.
Crew filed a lawsuit against Trump on his first day in office in 2017 alleging that he had broken the US constitution’s emoluments clauses, which prohibit federal officeholders from accepting gifts from foreign governments.
When Trump’s presidency ended, the case remained pending because he had refused to give up his commercial holdings.
Over twelve Trump administration officials were reprimanded as a result of crew ethical concerns.
Public officials are prohibited from asking for or accepting anything of value in exchange for performing an official act under the bribery statute, 18 USC 201(b).
Within the confines of campaign finance laws, presidential candidates are able to ask for donations and to communicate their policy goals to businesses that could find them advantageous.
However, once in office, they are not permitted to directly solicit donations in exchange for performing altruistic deeds.
Read Also:Â Fraudulent Schemes: Miami Tag Agency Clerk Charged in $3 Million Title Scandal
According to Professor Deborah Hellman of the University of Virginia law school, there would need to be proof that Trump pledged to remove rules in exchange for donations in order for the bribery statute to be used. “It is a quid pro quo for him to say, ‘I’m going to do it, so you should want me to get elected,’ but it is not,” the statement reads.
Although investigations into the Mar-a-Lago meeting have so far concentrated on Trump’s behavior, fossil fuel corporations are also being closely examined. Politico revealed last week that the US oil sector is developing executive orders for Trump to sign in anticipation of a potential second term.
The directives would increase exports of natural gas and allow offshore oil drilling.
This election cycle, the fossil fuel sector has already given $7.3 million to organizations supporting Trump’s candidacy and his campaign, according to Federal Election Commission data collated by nonprofit watchdog OpenSecrets.
