About that Trump lawyer letter leaked to the NYT

Dan Froomkin has some of the same concerns I had about that NYT article.

 

Yes, they know it very well, since they're who it was leaked to.

Dan  continues:

Consider that this unsourced and yet in no way qualified paragraph is the Times clearly indicating that they were told things directly by Trump's lawyers, but only on condition that then not attribute it to anyone at all.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers fear that if he answers questions, either voluntarily or in front of a grand jury, he risks exposing himself to accusations of lying to investigators, a potential crime or impeachable offense.

When I read that paragraph, I thought The Times was just making a judgment on their own according to their interviews and beliefs and other reports, but I did think that was lousy reporting to assert what Mr. Trump's lawyers fear without any reference or attribution. I figured they were in for another nasty tweet - and deservedly so - for claiming to know what Mr. Trump's lawyers fear. I was bracing for another "Fake News!" tweet about the "failing New York Times". It hasn't happened, and Dan Froomkin's claim makes more sense than my assumption and would explain the lack of any nasty Trump tweet about this NYT article.

Back to Dan...

That's actually a strange amalgam of "off the record" which means they can't publish it at all unless they get it from someone else, and "on background" which means they can use it but only attribute it in an agreed-upon way.

So what exactly did the Times reporters promise Trump's lawyers? Did they promise to publicly leave open the possibility that the leak came from Mueller's team?

Because it seems to me that it would serve the public interest to know that Trump was wrong, and that it didn't come from Mueller, if the Times knows that to be the case.

So if the Times reporters promised they wouldn't deny it came from Mueller, they were essentially abetting a big lie.

I also thought the story was ridiculously lacking in skepticism and pushback. It's not hard to explain that corrupt intent may well Trump any executive assertion of power.

I thought the same thing.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.