While answering questions from Special Counsel Robert Mueller, it looks like President Trump made use of some very strategic language to protect himself.
A new report from CNN sheds light on two of the answers Trump has provided Mueller, who is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. Trump reportedly says in writing that he did not speak with political consultant Roger Stone about WikiLeaks, nor did he know ahead of time about his son's 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer who said she had damaging information about Hillary Clinton.
The answers come with an important caveat, though, as the president reportedly "made clear he was answering to the best of his recollection." Legal experts told CNN that this caveat is "standard procedure as a way to try to shield a client should their recollections be challenged." Trump has said he has "one of the great memories of all time," per Business Insider.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Text messages and emails have suggested that Stone may have had prior knowledge of WikiLeaks' plan to release emails that Russians hacked from the Democratic National Committee, so of interest to Mueller is whether Trump was also aware; Stone says he never discussed Wikileaks with Trump, and that's also what Trump is claiming.
Meanwhile, another key question is whether Trump was aware ahead of time that his son, Donald Trump Jr., planned to meet with a Russian lawyer to obtain dirt about Clinton. The president claims he didn't know that this meeting was going to take place, and he has now officially made this claim in his statements to Mueller — statements which, despite his hedging, CNN notes, "could be subject to criminal charges if false."
-
Prince charming: Harry’s tea with King sparks royal reconciliation rumoursTalking Point Are the royals (and the UK public) ready to welcome the Duke of Sussex back in?
-
Has Israel’s Qatar strike scuppered a ceasefire?Today’s Big Question Netanyahu ‘gambles’ on ‘overwhelming strength’ rather than diplomacy in attack on Hamas negotiation team in Doha
-
Deaf Republic: ‘an experimental epic of war and resistance’The Week Recommends Ukrainian-American writer Ilya Kaminsky’s poetry collection is brought to the stage in this ‘enthralling’ production
-
House posts lewd Epstein note attributed to TrumpSpeed Read The estate of Jeffrey Epstein turned over the infamous 2003 birthday note from President Donald Trump
-
Supreme Court allows 'roving' race-tied ICE raidsSpeed Read The court paused a federal judge's order barring agents from detaining suspected undocumented immigrants in LA based on race
-
South Korea to fetch workers detained in Georgia raidSpeed Read More than 300 South Korean workers detained in an immigration raid at a Hyundai plant will be released
-
DC sues Trump to end Guard 'occupation'Speed Read D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb argues that the unsolicited military presence violates the law
-
RFK Jr. faces bipartisan heat in Senate hearingSpeed Read The health secretary defended his leadership amid CDC turmoil and deflected questions about the restricted availability of vaccines
-
White House defends boat strike as legal doubts mountSpeed Read Experts say there was no legal justification for killing 11 alleged drug-traffickers
-
Epstein accusers urge full file release, hint at own listspeed read A rally was organized by Reps. Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie, who are hoping to force a vote on their Epstein Files Transparency Act
-
Court hands Harvard a win in Trump funding battleSpeed Read The Trump administration was ordered to restore Harvard's $2 billion in research grants
