Meh. Better than purposefully trying to muddy the waters.

The poster was highlighting that the post-event “explanations” of the meeting have turned out to be lies that had to be back tracked after discovery of contradictory contemporaneous emails discussing some of the meeting.

They are stating, quite rationally, that they would disregard any after the fact cover story from the Trump’s but would rely on the emails from the time of the event as primary evidence and very reliable.

That is, if we want to be rational about this.

As an aside, if anyone thinks Trump didn’t know about this meeting needs their head examined.

What do you call it when everyone lies about a supposed “total legal” meeting?

Suspicious.

1 Like