bullshit said:
The only other Russian contact during the campaign is one I did not recall at all until I was reviewing documents and emails in response to congressional requests for information. In June 2016, my brother-in-law, Donald Trump Jr. asked if I was free to stop by a meeting on June 9 at 3:00 p.m. The campaign was headquartered in the same building as his office in Trump Tower, and it was common for each of us to swing by the other's meetings when requested. He eventually sent me his own email changing the time of the meeting to 4:00 p.m. That email was on top of a long back and forth that I did not read at the time.
Nice plausible deniability.
Well sure, I got an email that explains that this was an attempt to collude with the Russians, but I didn't read it and Donnie Jr didn't mention a thing about it.
Funny how there were multiple players with Russian connections to a company who was under investigation by the US. What I find funny is that I believe
only Donald Trump Jr. has admitted that Clinton intel was ever part of this meeting.
bullshit said:
I arrived at the meeting a little late. When I got there, the person who has since been identified as a Russian attorney was talking about the issue of a ban on U.S. adoptions of Russian children. I had no idea why that topic was being raised and quickly determined that my time was not well-spent at this meeting. Reviewing emails recently confirmed my memory that the meeting was a waste of our time and that, in looking for a polite way to leave and get back to my work, I actually emailed an assistant from the meeting after I had been there for ten or so minutes and wrote "Can u pls call me on my cell? Need excuse to get out of meeting."
"For a polite way to leave?" He shows up late to a meeting he cares to know nothing about, is in a room with strangers (including a Russian interpreter), and the thinks it is a waste of his time, without allegedly knowing anything about the meeting... but he needs a polite reason to leave.
bullshit said:
Approximately a week later, on December 6, the Embassy asked if I could meet with the Ambassador on December 7. I declined. They then asked if I could meet on December 6; I declined again. They then asked when the earliest was that I could meet. I declined these requests because I was working on many other responsibilities for the transition. He asked if he could meet my assistant instead and, to avoid offending the Ambassador, I agreed. He did so on December 12. My assistant reported that the Ambassador had requested that I meet with a person named Sergey Gorkov who he said was a banker and someone with a direct line to the Russian President who could give insight into how Putin was viewing the new administration and best ways to work together. I agreed to meet Mr. Gorkov because the Ambassador has been so insistent, said he had a direct relationship with the President, and because Mr. Gorkov was only in New York for a couple days. I made room on my schedule for the meeting that occurred the next day, on December 13.
I'm seeing this repeatedly. Kuschner is a real nice guy. He doesn't want to offend anyone. It is all a big misunderstanding. So anyway... I completely told the Ambassador to fuck off, but because he was so insistent, I met with some random Russian banker guy because he'd give me the skinny on Putin's views of us.
I agree with Artemus. The narrative reads like 'poor little boy in the woods'. It is a very intentional narrative, and if I was a US Senator, my first question would be "Based on your opening statement, it sounds like you are admitting to being extremely naive. In fact, it seems like if you didn't collude with the Russians, you could have done even worse damage allowing yourself to be used by them."
Meanwhile, Kuschner will smile and nod and not much will come of this, except for his bidding musical number, "Throwing Donnie Jr. Under the Bus".
Hanlon's Razor ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"), but it seems a bit too convenient here. I'm sure that a large majority of the republican congress will publicly accept it at face value, though. (At least until Mueller's report comes out)
