- Joined
- Jul 24, 2011
- Messages
- 59,701
- Reaction score
- 51,747
- Location
- Georgia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/14/politics/trump-russia-mueller/index.html
Let's pause on the political aspects of this for the moment and just concentrate on the optics.
If you had an organization, corporation, government, etc. that had a cloud of suspicion hovering over it, a cloud that had to do with accusations of improper relations with another leader, and then the leader of that first organization later met with that leader of the second AND covered his tracks as much as he could... What would people who acted reasonably conclude that the optics of that meeting would be?
This particular question is NOT one of whether Trump is outright guilty. That's not the point here. The point is the optics. If you're the leader, and you have a cloud of suspicion hanging over your head, exactly why would you do something that is just going raise yet another red flag?
Also, because I know some loyal Trump supporter is going to say it, no, anything along the lines of "He's the president, he knows what he's doing" is NOT an acceptable answer. Because that's not how you defuse a cloud of suspicion.
Why did Trump go out of his way to ensure that no records of his meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin exist?
"President Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, including on at least one occasion taking possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructing the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials, current and former U.S. officials said....
"The constraints that Trump imposed are part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States' main adversaries."
Let's pause on the political aspects of this for the moment and just concentrate on the optics.
If you had an organization, corporation, government, etc. that had a cloud of suspicion hovering over it, a cloud that had to do with accusations of improper relations with another leader, and then the leader of that first organization later met with that leader of the second AND covered his tracks as much as he could... What would people who acted reasonably conclude that the optics of that meeting would be?
This particular question is NOT one of whether Trump is outright guilty. That's not the point here. The point is the optics. If you're the leader, and you have a cloud of suspicion hanging over your head, exactly why would you do something that is just going raise yet another red flag?
Also, because I know some loyal Trump supporter is going to say it, no, anything along the lines of "He's the president, he knows what he's doing" is NOT an acceptable answer. Because that's not how you defuse a cloud of suspicion.
Why, if you are Trump, would you purposely shield your conversations with Putin even from your own aides? Why would you take notes from a translator at one encounter and urge that person not to reveal what transpired -- even to your senior aides? Why would you, as Miller notes in his story, ensure that "there is no detailed record, even in classified files, of Trump's face-to-face interactions with the Russian leader at five locations over the past two years."