Monday's HOT MIC
Too late to change the narrative about Trump Jr.'s meeting with the Russian lawyer (None Dare Call it Treason except a former Bush aide), but it's amazing what ignoring the plain English of what the Times story says can do for a meme.
First, there's this:
It is unclear whether the Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, actually produced the promised compromising information about Mrs. Clinton. But the people interviewed by The Times about the meeting said the expectation was that she would do so.
It isn't "unclear." It's "unknown." There's a difference that appears to be lost on the Times' editors.
The people interviewed by the Times have absolutely no idea if the Clinton stuff was discussed. So why quote them? "Expectations" of what was discussed is a load of crap. They don't know.
Then, there's this from Trump Jr.'s statement:
“After pleasantries were exchanged,” he said, “the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. 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.”
Pardon me. I know that the Times is out to get Trump but aren't they just a little teensy weensy bit curious about the DNC being funded by Russia and Putin's government wanting Hillary to win?
Wouldn't that be bombshell information for a real news organization to investigate?
We are supposed to believe that the top echelon of the Trump campaign met with a Russian contact to plot the the downfall of Hillary Clinton. Trump Jr., Manafort, and Kushner are either the dumbest traitors in history - attending a meeting with a Russian that so many knew about that it would be impossible to keep secret - or this is business as usual politics. The Russian lawyer denies that they discussed anything about the campaign at all. There is no evidence that the campaign principles discussed anything illegal or even unethical with the lawyer.
I'm with Michael. This story is a "big yawn."