In true W/H fashion
(Huckabee-Sanders) plays down Papadopoulos
(Practically
says he's "nobody" and "we disavow" him PR statement)
Update of a
fast-moving story from that post seen below. This from the Washington Post and
their string of 7 key questions (below and non-edited – except for my emphasis added in red).
First his short video that asks the
question: “Who is George Papadopoulos?”
====================================================
1. Who is the “campaign supervisor” with
whom Papadopoulos emailed in detail about setting up a Trump-Putin meeting?
After a
March 24, 2016, meeting with an unnamed London professor and an unnamed Russian
national whom Papadopoulos at one point believed to be Vladimir Putin's niece,
Papadopoulos emailed a “Campaign Supervisor and several members of the
Campaign's foreign policy team,” according to the document. He told them the
meeting was to set up another meeting between the campaign and “Russian
leadership to discuss U.S.-Russia ties under President Trump.”
The
“Campaign Supervisor” at this point replied: “Great work.”
Later, about
June 1, Papadopoulos emailed the same “supervisor” to say that a “Russian MFA”
wanted to set up a meeting between Trump and Putin. The supervisor urged
Papadopoulos to make the trip with another foreign policy adviser instead.
The campaign and the
White House have repeatedly denied contacts with Russia during the 2016 race. The denials even came from Trump himself and Vice President Pence.
But this particular set of emails (and more to
come below) suggest that several members of the campaign were aware
of contacts discussing a desire on behalf of the Russian government to broker a
meeting.
2. Who is the Trump campaign official
who urged that the meeting not include Trump “so as not to send any signal?”
And what does that even mean?
In a
tantalizing footnote, someone described as a “high-ranking official” on the
Trump campaign forwarded a Papadopoulos email to another official in late May
and said:
“We
need someone to communicate that DT is not doing these trips. It should be
someone low level in the campaign so as not to send any signal.”
So yet
again, we have a top official in the campaign who was aware of Papadopoulos's
contacts with Russia — Papadopoulos titled the email “Request from Russia” —
and thought it through enough to offer a different course of action.
Along with
the “supervisor” and members of the foreign policy team above, that's another
apparently high-ranking Trump campaign official who knew about this. How could the
campaign and White House go on to deny such contacts?
Also juicy
here: What does “so as not to send any signal” mean? Some see that as a
potential tell when it comes to a larger effort to coordinate with the
Russians, which is the big unanswered question in this whole investigation. But
it could also simply be that they didn't want to telegraph a close alliance
with Russia, which could have been politically problematic.
3. Was Trump present when
Papadopoulos said that he could set up a Trump-Putin meeting?
The
indictment says Papadopoulos attended a “national security meeting” on about
March 31 with “Trump and other foreign policy advisers for the Campaign.”
It says Papadopoulos
told “the group” that he had connections and could arrange a Trump-Putin
meeting. The text doesn't say whether Trump was present for this claim. But if
he was, it would render Trump's own denials of his campaign's contact with
Russia pretty dishonest.
4. Who is the “senior policy adviser”
Papadopoulos emailed saying Russia had an “open invitation” for a Trump-Putin
meeting?
This is yet
another high-level aide who would have known there was contact with Russia.
Papadopoulos told this “adviser” on April 25 that “these governments tend to
speak a bit more openly in 'neutral' cities” — playing up his own stationing in
London.
5. Who is the other “high-ranking
official” whom Papadopoulos told that the Russian government had “relayed to me
that they are interested in hosting Mr. Trump?”
This is a
different “high-ranking official” than the one mentioned above. But it's
another person who apparently knew, based on multiple emails, about what the
campaign and White House would later deny.
6. Who is “Putin's niece?”
It may be
neither here nor there in this whole sequence, but Papadopoulos seems to have
believed at one point that the unnamed London professor introduced him to
Putin's niece, identifying her as such in an email to the campaign. He later says
it wasn't actually Putin's niece.
But who was
it? And did Papadopoulos not seek to verify this information? Or was he trying
to inflate his connections in the email? It's all very strange.
And for that matter,
who is the unnamed London professor?
7. What is he doing to cooperate?
At the very
end, the indictment says Papadopoulos was arrested at Dulles International
Airport in suburban Washington on July 27 of this year. It says he has talked
with the government “on numerous occasions to provide information and answer
questions.”
It is
suspected that the special counsel is trying to flip Paul Manafort and get him
to cooperate via his own indictment. Papadopoulos was far less central to the
campaign, but here we actually have someone who is cooperating.
What did he
agree to share in his plea deal? And what does he even have to share? This may
be the biggest question of all.
My
Conclusion at this Point: Wow – what a story – just like a mini-serious or TV reality show –
which I might add, Trump loves the suspense – that is to announce today that he
will be making a big announcement soon or in the near future … to drive up
ratings and suspense for his followers to tune in, no doubt.
What a showman Trump is. But I am totally convinced he
knows precisely what he is doing and why and where it’s all leading – bet on
it.
That’s the con part… carefully thought out and planned
next move with options along the way for sudden shifts as long as his loyalist stay
in step, if not “You’re fired” rings true.
Thanks for stopping by.
No comments:
Post a Comment