If anyone ever doubted Donald Trump Jr.’s rumored reputation as the “Fredo Corleone” of his family, he’s reinforcing this role by freaking out over the New York Times reports about his sketchy meeting with a Kremlin-connected lawyer over “adoption law.” Few people believed the adoption-law excuse, and a later report detailed how Don Jr. actually met with the attorney because she offered “damaging information” about rival Hillary Clinton. And on Monday, Don Jr. (while retweeting the Drudge Report) admitted to seeking out this information: “Obviously I’m the first person on a campaign to ever take a meeting to hear info about an opponent … went nowhere but had to listen.”
Cue the sound of several White House lawyers hitting their heads against desks. Yet it isn’t as if Don Jr. is a stranger to confirming things on Twitter, purposefully or not (he takes after his father?). Further, the tweet is a natural progression of his contrasting statements over the weekend that did not (even slightly) disprove the New York Times‘ reports. First, Don Jr. claimed to have had no idea who he was meeting, and he blamed an acquaintance for organizing the shindig. Second, Don Jr. sounded sad that the meeting didn’t yield the Hillary Clinton information that he would have preferred:
“After pleasantries were exchanged, the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the [DNC] and supporting Ms. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information. She then changed subjects and began discussing the adoption of Russian children and mentioned the Magnitsky Act. It became clear to me that this was the true agenda all along and that the claims of potentially helpful information were a pretext for the meeting.”
While these reports may ultimately bring no consequence, some believe that Don Jr.’s actions carry more than a whiff of collusion with Russia. And since the New York Times spoke with a total of five White House advisors who decided to leak information on this meeting, it’s likely that the reports will only continue. This, of course, turns into a battle of the unnamed sources on talk shows, but leakers are gonna leak.
(Via New York times)