Read on Twitter
#Papadopoulos says that Trump’s response at the March 31 meeting was “non-committal interest” (my wording, not his), and that he looked to see what #Sessions’ response would be. tinyurl.com/y9gup3xo
1/ This is beyond odd. There is absolutely no reason why Trump would have deferred to Sessions on this matter.
2/ Keep in mind that at this point Paul Manafort, who didn’t attend the meeting but who had brought along with him all his Russian-Ukrainian connections, was already the de facto campaign chairman.
3/ I believe Trump and Manafort were already up their eyeballs in collusion (aka conspiracy) at that point. But Trump wasn’t sure what Sessions’ response would be.
4/ Interestingly, Papadopoulos reports that there was no consensus in the meeting that pursuing the offer was a good idea. He mentions that there were even some conservative Heritage Foundation types at the meeting who didn’t approve of it.
5/ So I think Trump was simply holding back to gauge the reaction of others. This must have been especially true of Sessions, as he had been appointed by Trump to be the head of the campaign’s natsec team.
6/ To get the Trump-Russia collusion timeline straight, it is crucial to understand that at this meeting Trump was already in on plans for collusion, the details of which were undoubtedly being worked out by Manafort--whatever Trump might have thought of this particular overture.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
