Nicholas Grossman
Jul 21, 2017 · 1 min read

Two questions:

  1. Why do you believe the fifth (or is it sixth?) account of the meeting Don Jr. set up, when the first four or five turned out to be inaccurate?
  2. Are you assuming that what we currently know is the most incriminating information that will ever come out?

I ask, because when I wrote about this, I argued that seeing months of insistent denials — that there was any contact whatsoever between the Trump campaign and the Russian government — get disproven so completely meant I no longer could give them the benefit of the doubt.

That means my answer to (1) is I don’t believe them, and (2) is I think the chances of additional, more incriminating information surfacing is higher than the chances none will.

If your point is simply that the emails we’ve seen and the Trump team’s current story about the meeting and its interactions with the Russian government are not in and of themselves a serious legal — or even ethical — violation, fine.

But, in that case, how about laying out what, hypothetically, would constitute an ethical violation for you?

)

Nicholas Grossman

Written by

Senior Editor at Arc Digital. Poli Sci prof (IR) at U. Illinois. Author of “Drones and Terrorism.” Politics, national security, and occasional nerdery.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade