Looks like the House Judiciary Committee knows something about Donald Trump’s secret meetings with Putin

| 6:10 pm EST March 4, 2019
Dear Palmer Report readers, we all understand the difficult era we're heading into. Major media outlets are caving to Trump already. Even the internet itself and publishing platforms may be at risk. But Palmer Report is nonetheless going to lead the fight. We're funding our 2025 operating expenses now, so we can keep publishing no matter what happens. I'm asking you to contribute if you can, because the stakes are just so high. You can donate here.

The House Judiciary Committee targeted dozens of Trump-related people and entities today, in an attempt at exposing every criminal aspect of Donald Trump’s past and present. Most of the targets received document requests today on similar, wide-ranging topics. But a small handful of people are being asked for documents on specific topics that are, shall we say, illuminating.

Of all the people targeted today, the House Judiciary Committee made a point of asking two people – Trump’s longtime personal secretary Rhona Graff and former Trump administration adviser Tom Bossert – for “the contents of meetings between President Trump and Vladimir Putin on July 7th, 2017, November 11th, 2017, July 16th, 2018, and November 30th, 2018.” These are the meetings where Trump went to great lengths to ensure that the content of his discussions with Putin remained secret.

So why would the House Judiciary Committee know to ask these two people in particular for documents about the secret Trump-Putin meetings? This doesn’t feel like a random stab in the dark. The committee must know something specific, that’s not yet public, about why these two people would have this information.

The only faint potential clues we have are that Michael Cohen recently testified in public that Rhona Graff was on the line when Donald Trump was discussing WikiLeaks with Roger Stone, and that Tom Bossert abruptly resigned from the Trump regime as soon as Kremlin puppet John Bolton was appointed. But even that doesn’t give us much to go on. It’s becoming clear that the House Judiciary Committee is several steps ahead of what’s publicly known.