Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Donald Trump Jr. provided two significantly different statements over the weekend to address a Trump Tower meeting he took with a Russian lawyer last June.
His most recent statement acknowledged that he was promised information on soon-to-be Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. His original statement left out this key point.
His first statement was issued Saturday, as The New York Times revealed the existence of the meeting among Trump Jr., then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, now a senior White House adviser and Trump’s son-in-law, and the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.
The initial story highlighted the meeting’s existence, to which Trump Jr. responded that it “was a short introductory meeting” that focused on “a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government.”
But on Sunday, the Times followed up on its original story with the detail that Trump Jr. was promised damaging information about Clinton before agreeing to meet with Veselnitskaya, a Kremlin-connected lawyer. Three advisers to the White House were were briefed on the meeting, in addition to two others with knowledge of it, told the Times of the promise following the Saturday story confirming the meeting’s existence. Although it was unclear whether Veselnitskaya produced any damaging information on Clinton, the sources who spoke with the Times said she was expected to provide such knowledge.
The new details led to Trump Jr.’s second statement. In it, he confirmed that the meeting was taken on the premise that Veselnitskaya had information related to Clinton — and that the adoption issue was not what he believed was the purpose of the meeting.
“After pleasantries were exchanged, the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Ms. Clinton,” Trump Jr. said. “Her statements were vague, ambiguous, and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”
“She then changed subjects and began discussing the adoption of Russian children and mentioned the Magnitsky Act,” he said. “It became clear to be that this was the true agenda all along and that the claims of potentially helpful information were a pretext for the meeting. I interrupted and advised her that my father was not an elected official, but rather a private citizen, and that her comments and concerns were better addressed if and when he held public office.”
He said the meeting lasted about 20 or 30 minutes, there was no follow-up, and that his father “knew nothing of the meeting or these events.”
The meeting is the first confirmed private meeting involving some of the closest members of Trump’s campaign orbit and Russians during the campaign, the Times wrote, noting that “the accounts of the meeting represent the first public indication that at least some in the campaign were willing to accept Russian help.”
The adoption issue in question is related to the Magnitsky Act, a US law that blacklisted Russians suspected of human-rights abuses. As a response to the US law, Russian President Vladimir Putin barred US citizens from adopting Russian children.
Mark Corallo, the spokesperson for Trump’s lawyer, told the Times on Sunday that “the president was not aware of and did not attend the meeting.”
The meeting was first disclosed to government officials in recent days by Kushner, who filed a revised security clearance form.
Robert Mueller, the special counsel appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in May after Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey, is overseeing an investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials during the course of the election season.
Read the two statements
Saturday:
“It was a short introductory meeting. I asked Jared and Paul to stop by. We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at that time and there was no follow up.”
“I was asked to attend the meeting by an acquaintance, but was not told the name of the person I would be meeting with beforehand.”
Sunday:
“I was asked to have a meeting by an acquaintance I knew from the 2013 Miss Universe pageant with an individual who I was told might have information helpful to the campaign. I was not told her name prior to the meeting. I asked Jared and Paul to attend, but told them nothing of the substance.”
“We had a meeting in June 2016. After pleasantries were exchanged, the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Ms. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous, and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”
“She then changed subjects and began discussing the adoption of Russian children and mentioned the Magnitsky Act. It became clear to be that this was the true agenda all along and that the claims of potentially helpful information were a pretext for the meeting. I interrupted and advised her that my father was not an elected official, but rather a private citizen, and that her comments and concerns were better addressed if and when he held public office.”
“The meeting lasted approximately 20 to 30 minutes. As it ended, my acquaintance apologized for taking up our time. That was the end of it and there was no further contact or follow-up of any kind. My father knew nothing of the meeting or these events.”
