In undersized than 24 hours, President Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., relinquished two different explanations for a meeting he held during the 2016 campaign with a Kremlin-connected Russian counsel who promised to provide damaging information about Hillary Clinton.
Trump Jr.’s rendezvous with that lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, was first reported by The New York Times on Saturday. In feedback, Trump Jr. said the meeting was brief and focused mostly on the issue of adoption.
This was Trump Jr.’s annunciation to the media on Saturday:
«It was a short introductory meeting. I asked Jared and Paul to pause by. We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was lively and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian oversight, but it was not a campaign issue at the time and there was no follow up.
«I was asked to attend the assignation by an acquaintance, but was not told the name of the person I would be meeting with beforehand.»
The announcement made reference to Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law, and Paul Manafort, the president’s prior campaign manager.
Trump Jr.’s version of the meeting changed Sunday, when three mentors to the White House briefed on the meeting and two others with knowledge of it stated The Times that Trump Jr. met Veselnitskaya after she promised to provide wounding information on Clinton.
Trump Jr. acknowledged on Sunday that Veselnitskaya put on the marketed him information on Clinton but that her statements «made no sense» and the information was not «suggestive.»
This is the statement Trump Jr. gave to the media on Sunday:
«I was asked to clothed a meeting by an acquaintance I knew from the 2013 Miss Universe show with an individual who I was told might have information helpful to the effort. I was not told her name prior to the meeting. I asked Jared and Paul to chaperone, but told them nothing of the substance. We had a meeting in June 2016. After pleasantries were exchanged, the popsy stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Popular National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton. Her statements were vague, puzzling and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It apace became clear that she had no meaningful information. She then changed enslaves and began discussing the adoption of Russian children and mentioned the Magnitsky Act. It befitted clear to me that this was the true agenda all along and that the petitions of potentially helpful information were a pretext for the meeting. I interrupted and cautioned her that my father was not an elected official, but rather a private citizen, and that her comments and charges were better addressed if and when he held public office. The encounter lasted approximately 20 to 30 minutes. As it ended, my acquaintance express regretted for taking up our time. That was the end of it and there was no further contact or follow-up of any tolerant. My father knew nothing of the meeting or these events.»
For more newsletters click here