A day ago, the New York Times dropped its latest embarrassing, but ultimately meaningless, leak from Senate investigators, who told the Grey Lady (under the cover of anonymity, of course) that Donald Trump Jr. had testified that he was trying to determine Hillary Clinton’s “fitness” for office when he took the infamous “Russia meeting” at Trump Tower in June 2016, shortly after his father had cemented his grip on the Republican nomination.
Already, the White House – or perhaps a sympathetic lawmaker – is helping Trump Jr. fight back. According to a Politico report citing unnamed government officials, notes taken by former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort during the Russia meeting show nothing damaging to the Trump family or campaign officials.
“The notes from the meeting do not contain any damaging information about Clinton or references to promises of damaging information about her, nor do they indicate that officials on the campaign were promising favors or seeking them in return for money, the people who’ve seen them said.
According to these people, the notes have been with Senate officials for weeks and have been reviewed by a number of people on Capitol Hill. Also in attendance at the June 2016 meeting in New York were a Russian lawyer, a Russian businessman and other Trump campaign officials, including Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law.”
Manafort is believed to be the primary target in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. Earlier this month, Mueller reportedly enlisted the help of an “elite” IRS investigative unit to scrutinize Manafort’s tax returns, a sign, one expert said, that the prosecutor could be looking for a “check the box” violation – or literally anything he could use against Manafort, regardless of its relevancy to the Trump campaign. He first turned over his notes to the Senate back in June when he met with investigators for closed-door testimony.
Those who’ve seen the notes say they are “not likely to be independently vital in any case.”
“Officials who have reviewed the notes say they are not likely to be independently vital to any case, if at all, because they are difficult to follow, particularly one year later. To be sure, the notes are not an exhaustive account of the meeting, and other things could have been discussed that are not included in the notes.”
In an interesting twist, the people said the notes reference financier Bill Browder, a supporter of the Magnitsky Act and enemy of the Russian government. As Politico reminds us, the act sanctioned Russian officials for human rights abuses. In retaliation for those sanctions, Russia banned US citizens from adopting Russian children. Browder is the same Russian official who revealed to lawmakers that the opposition-research firm Fusion GPS, which commissioned former UK spy Christopher Steele to assemble the now debunked “Trump dossier,” was funded in part by money from Russian entities – complicating the investigation’s narrative of Russian interference to benefit Trump.
In accordance with the version events given by everyone in attendance who has spoken with Congressional investigators of the special counsel – a group that includes a Russian lobbyist – the notes include a spirited case on why
Trump officials should overturn the Magnitsky act, and why Republicans could support it. It indicates that the Russian officials made critical comments about Browder, but that Trump officials seemed to know little about the legislation.
There you have it, folks. The grand Russian conspiracy – to convince the Trumps to overturn a minor law that had sparked outrage back home. We wonder: when will investigators leak something that amounts to, you know, actual evidence that a crime was committed? Or will this patter of inconsequential details, sanctimoniously reported by the mainstream press, continue for the next four to eight years?