Newsletter Subject

Opinion: Your guide to the scandal

From

nytimes.com

Email Address

nytdirect@nytimes.com

Sent On

Tue, Oct 31, 2017 12:26 PM

Email Preheader Text

Plus: Conservative media’s counterprogramming. View in | Add nytdirect@nytimes.com to your addr

Plus: Conservative media’s counterprogramming. View in [Browser]( | Add nytdirect@nytimes.com to your address book. [The New York Times]( [The New York Times]( Tuesday, October 31, 2017 [NYTimes.com/Opinion »]( [David Leonhardt] David Leonhardt Op-Ed Columnist There is still far more that we don’t know about the Russia investigation than we do. Below is a quick summary of the investigation’s major points — and it’s meant to be a small-c conservative summary. [I understand why]( many people are ready to believe the worst about President Trump, but you will be able to follow the story more clearly if you avoid jumping to unproven conclusions. What we know: A Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, had extensive talks with people linked to the Russian government, about “dirt” and “thousands of emails” that Russia had on Hillary Clinton. The Russians told him they were “open for cooperation” with the Trump campaign, as Papadopoulos [later told federal investigators](. Papadopoulos was more than the lowly volunteer that the White House is now making him out to be. In a March 2016 [interview]( with The Washington Post, when Trump was bragging about the quality of his foreign policy advisers, Papadopoulos was the third person he named — “excellent guy,” Trump said. But Papadopoulos does not appear to have been at the center of the presidential campaign. Rather than making decisions himself, he asked for guidance from more senior Trump campaign officials. Some senior campaign officials were clearly willing to talk with the Russians. The documents released yesterday suggest as much. So does Donald Trump Jr.’s [previously reported]( meeting with a Russian lawyer who had promised dirt on Clinton. For now, these conversations seem to be separate from the charges filed against Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman, and Rick Gates. Manafort and Gates were charged with secretly working as agents of a foreign (Russian-backed) government for years, hiding their income from that work and lying about it to federal investigators. It’s certainly possible that Manafort also colluded with Russia during the presidential campaign. It’s also possible that prosecutors are using the other alleged illegal activity as leverage to get Manafort to cooperate in the campaign investigations. What we don’t know: Did Trump campaign officials collude with Russian agents on the release of the emails? There is not yet any public evidence that the conversations between campaign officials and Russian agents led to actual coordination. Maybe Russia’s approaches to the Trump campaign went nowhere — and that Russia then released the emails anyway, for its own purposes. That would be a far less damning series of events for Trump and his aides. Which senior Trump campaign officials were aware of — or participated in — Papadopoulos’s conversations with Russian agents? The Papadopoulos plea agreement includes multiple references to his exchanges with an unnamed campaign supervisor. “Great work,” the supervisor told him, about the conversations. How much more did top officials know, and what did they do? What’s the relationship, if any, between the Papadopoulos conversations and Donald Trump Jr.’s later meeting with a Russian lawyer? The approach to Trump, which came later, didn’t seem to building off of the Papadopoulos talks, based on what we know so far. It seems to have been a fresh, separate approach. Is that because the Papdopoulos talks went nowhere? [What did President Trump know, and when did he know it?]( So far, the investigation has publicly linked Trump to the Papadopoulos conversations only through a single meeting involving multiple people. At it, Papadopoulos told Trump he could set up a meeting between Trump and Vladimir Putin. It remains unclear how Trump responded, if at all, and what else he knew about any of the links between his campaign and Russia. What does Robert Mueller, the special counsel, already know that he hasn’t made public? The best guess seems to be: A lot. Yesterday’s filings were full of new information, which suggests that Mueller is releasing information on his own timeline, rather than having it drip out through anonymous leaks — as The Times’s Nick Confessore [noted](. Daniel Alonso, a former federal prosecutor, [tweeted]( “Mueller/FBI/IRS are not leaking. Exactly as it should be.” • A campaign of ‘confusion.’ “Trump’s media allies downplay, deflect and deny stories that are trouble for the White House,” [CNN’s Brian Stelter explained](. “Instead, they tell viewers and readers to hate Hillary Clinton.” “This is a campaign of confusion. It is one of the most important things happening in politics today,” Stelter said. And it was in full swing yesterday, as Trump’s media allies tried to shift attention toward fake Clinton scandals. Fox News hosts talked about uranium ([a non-scandal]( and cheeseburger emojis ([seriously]( although [Shep Smith]( was a notable exception, covering the news in a reasonably accurate way. At RedState, a writer [argued]( “Today’s indictments were a huge disappointment to those hoping for a deus ex Mueller event to remove Donald Trump from the White House.” The charges against Papadopoulos, “[a bit player]( in this whole sorry melodrama,” were “preordained at the very moment he agreed to be interviewed by federal agents because if they want you, they got you.” On the Christian Broadcasting Network, the televangelist Pat Robertson [said]( that Trump “has every right to shut Mueller down … He can grant a blanket pardon for everybody involved in everything and say, ‘All right, I pardon them all. Case closed. It’s all over.’ And I think that is what he needs to do.” In The Times. [Michelle Goldberg]( [Nick Kristof]( [Harry Litman]( [David French]( [Norm]( Eisen, Noah Bookbinder, Barry Berke]( and the [editorial board]( all offer their takes on the Mueller news. On a lighter note. The original pinned [tweet]( The full Opinion report from The Times follows, including [Stephanie Kelton and Paul McCulley]( on Trump’s apparent Fed pick. Op-Ed Columnist [When Politics Becomes Your Idol]( By DAVID BROOKS To fix politics, care more about other things. Op-Ed Columnist [The Plot Against America]( By MICHELLE GOLDBERG Robert Mueller hands a gangster administration its first indictments. Op-Ed Columnist [Will Manafort Sing?]( By NICHOLAS KRISTOF If so, it may mark the beginning of the unraveling of this presidency. Op-Ed Columnist [Trump Won’t Bring Joy to Moolaville]( By PAUL KRUGMAN Republicans will do anything to cut taxes on the rich — and it won’t even make the rich happy Illustration by Adam Maida; Photograph by Hilary Swift/The New York Times [Editorial]( [Is the White House Scared Yet?]( By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Robert Mueller III makes his move and goes to the heart of Donald Trump’s campaign. Op-Ed Contributor [Why George Papadopoulos Is More Dangerous Than Paul Manafort]( By HARRY LITMAN For all of the talk about collusion with Russia, the adviser’s guilty plea is by far the most damning evidence of it. Op-Ed Contributor [Mueller’s Investigation Won’t Shake Trump’s Base]( By DAVID FRENCH Republicans are demonstrating a striking degree of hypocrisy because of partisanship and “fake news.” Op-Ed Contributor [Manafort Indictment Is Bad News for Trump]( By NORMAN EISEN, NOAH BOOKBINDER AND BARRY BERKE The president and his allies say it’s old news. They’re wrong. Editorial Observer [Will the G.O.P. at Last Demand Answers on Trump and Russia?]( By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON The indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates leave Republicans in Congress no choice but to ask tough questions of the president and his aides. ADVERTISEMENT Op-Ed Contributors [The Dangerous Myth of the Judicial ‘Resistance’]( By DAHLIA LITHWICK AND STEPHEN I. VLADECK Denouncing judges who rule against the president is an attack on the independence and integrity of the entire judiciary. Op-Ed Contributors [The Fed Chair Should Be a ‘Principled Populist’]( By STEPHANIE KELTON AND PAUL MCCULLEY The economists Stephanie Kelton and Paul McCulley discuss applying the “smell test of social justice” to policy. Op-Ed Contributor [Climate Change Is Bad for Your Health]( By JEFF NESBIT A leading medical journal warns that the impact of planetary warming on human well-being is “far worse than previously understood.” Op-Ed Contributor [Why Unesco Needs the United States]( By HUGH EAKIN Without America’s political and military support of Unesco, we may find ourselves watching another Palmyra destroyed. [Your College Ghost Stories]( Natalie Andrewson Haunted dorms, Ouija boards and brushes with the supernatural. Op-Ed Contributor [When the Kitchen Isn’t Safe for Women]( By TRACIE MCMILLAN Raunchy talk can pave the way for something more sinister. Yet such talk is celebrated in many chef memoirs. Op-Ed Contributor [I’m 10. And I Want Girls to Raise Their Hands.]( By ALICE PAUL TAPPER I noticed that boys in my classes always seem more confident. That’s why my Girl Scout troop created a new patch. Op-Ed Contributor [Out of the Woods]( By PATRICK SAUER “Stranger Things” and Generation X’s misplaced nostalgia for unparented childhood. Vietnam ‘67 [When the Wise Men Failed]( By JONATHAN KIRSHNER Lyndon Johnson needed straight talk on the Vietnam War. Instead, America’s foreign policy establishment gave him a pep talk. SIGN UP FOR THE VIETNAM ’67 NEWSLETTER Examining America’s long war in Southeast Asia [through the course]( of a single year. ADVERTISEMENT Letters [Robert Mueller’s First Indictments. Who’s Next?]( Readers speculate about how the special counsel’s investigation will proceed and criticize the president’s tweets. HOW ARE WE DOING? We’d love your feedback on this newsletter. Please email thoughts and suggestions to [leonhardt@nytimes.com](mailto:leonhardt@nytimes.com?subject=Opinion%20Today%20Newsletter%20Feedback). FOLLOW OPINION [Facebook] [FACEBOOK]( [Twitter] [@nytopinion]( [Pinterest] [Pinterest]( Get more [NYTimes.com newsletters »](  | Get unlimited access to NYTimes.com and our NYTimes apps. [Subscribe »]( ABOUT THIS EMAIL You received this message because you signed up for NYTimes.com's Opinion Today newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Manage Subscriptions]( | [Change Your Email]( | [Privacy Policy]( | [Contact]( | [Advertise]( Copyright 2017 The New York Times Company 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

Marketing emails from nytimes.com

View More
Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2025 SimilarMail.