Boughton. Yeah. His summary of the August 4, 1944 report by KOLTSOV on his conversation with JURIST is:
"Koltsov reported that White had discussed a wide range of economic and political topics: Lend-Lease... the German economy after the war... trade policy... a loan to the Soviet Union... trip to Europe... Finland and Poland, and the likelihood of Roosevelt being reelected. The cable suggests that Koltsov asked for but did not get a document on Lend-Lease. They agreed to meet again in a few weeks, but in view of the risks involved, White proposed that they meet for drives in his car. Koltsov presented all of this to his superiors as an example of White's 'work with us', but it seems likely that White saw it in more benign terms, as a means of keeping an ally informed of pertinent developments..."
This is the report that contains:
"As regards the technique of further work with us JURIST said that his wife was [B% ready] for any self-sacrifice[;] he himself did not think about his personal security, but a compromise[PROVAL] would lead to a political scandal and [B% the discredit] of all supporters of the new course[o], therefore he would have to be very cautious. He asked whether he should [5 groups unrecovered] his work with us. I [O% replied] that he should refrain. JURIST has no suitable apartment for a permanent meeting place[;] all his friends are family people. Meetings could be held at their houses in such a way that one meeting devolved on each every 4-5 months. He proposes infrequent conversations lasting up to half an hour while driving in his automobile."
Boughton's (and Sandilands's) interpretation is possible, but barely possible. One doesn't worry that keeping an ally informed of pertinent developments will endanger one's personal security, require substantial self-sacrifice on the part of one's family, or discredit all supporters of the New Deal.
But I wish I could believe that Boughton is right...
Brad DeLong