Giuliani says Trump Tower meeting was for Clinton dirt

Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images

President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani said that the 2016 Trump Tower meeting was "originally for the purpose of getting information about ... [Hillary] Clinton" during an interview Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Why it matters: Along with Trump's shocking tweet on the subject earlier this month, it marks a huge reversal in the Trump team's narrative about that meeting — as Trump's initial statement said it was primarily about the adoption of Russian children, rather than opposition dirt from a Kremlin-linked lawyer.

More from Giuliani:

  • "That was the original intention of the meeting. It turned out to be a meeting about another subject and it was not pursued at all. And, of course, any meeting with regards to getting information on your opponent is something any candidate’s staff would take. If someone said, I have information about your opponent, you would take that meeting."
  • "All they knew that a woman with a Russian name was going to meet with them, they didn't know she represented the Russian government."

Reality check: Getting opposition information that potentially comes from a foreign government isn't a normal action during a presidential campaign. And the initial email sent to Donald Trump Jr. from Rob Goldstone that set the meeting into motion said it was meant as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump."

What's next

New York Times endorses Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar for president

Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Elizabeth Warrenand Sen. Amy Klobuchar at the December 2020 debatein Los Angeles. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The New York Times editorial board has endorsed Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar for president, in a decision announced on national television Sunday night.

Why it matters: The board writes in its editorial that its decision to endorse two candidates is a major break with convention that's intended to address the "realist" and "radical" models being presented to voters by the 2020 Democratic field.

Go deeperArrow50 mins ago - Media

What's next in the impeachment witness battle

Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Senators will almost certainly get to vote on whether or not to call impeachment witnesses. The resolution laying out the rules of the trial, which will be presented Tuesday, is expected to mandate that senators can take up-or-down votes on calling for witnesses and documents.

Yes, but: Those votes won't come until the House impeachment managers and President Trump's defense team deliver their opening arguments and field Senators' questions.

Inside Trump's impeachment strategy: The national security card

White House counsel Pat Cipollone and acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Trump officials say they feel especially bullish about one key argument against calling additional impeachment witnesses: It could compromise America's national security.

The big picture: People close to the president say their most compelling argument to persuade nervous Republican senators to vote against calling new witnesses is the claim that they're protecting national security.