Jared Kushner wanted secret communications channel with Russia

[pete311]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html

[Black Diamond]

Yawn.

[Kathianne]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html

Obama is treasonous according to many. Trump too, now Kushner. Somehow folks have a problem with the definition, Article III, Section III of the US Constitution:


Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

[gabosaurus]

Not treasonous. But certainly not law abiding. Then again, it appears that anyone connected with the Trump family or administration is above the law.

Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal.

[aboutime]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html



petey. Close your mouth, and stop breathing. You might scorch your own Hateful lungs on that phony smoke. PROVE IT. GIVE US THE HONEST FACTS before you declare anyone guilty. Other than yourself, for being so stupidly funny.

[pete311]

petey. Close your mouth, and stop breathing. You might scorch your own Hateful lungs on that phony smoke. PROVE IT. GIVE US THE HONEST FACTS before you declare anyone guilty. Other than yourself, for being so stupidly funny.

Hey look, it's the insult man, it's all he's got. Must be getting nervous.

[Gunny]

Hey look, it's the insult man, it's all he's got. Must be getting nervous.Kind of hypocritical of the left to give proven crimes a pass when it's a Dem, yet, want to convict on an allegation if it's a Republican. I must have THAT part of the US Constitution where it says the left is right no matter what.

Not to mention Kathianne pretty much nailed it. Treason is a hard crime to prove in the best or circumstances. I don't think talking to a Russian qualifies as even a local misdemeanor. You people that sling around the words "impeachment" and "treason" need to educate yourselves before opening your mouths.

[Black Diamond]

Hey look, it's the insult man, it's all he's got. Must be getting nervous.
Trump isn't going anywhere. You snowflakes can just continue to cream all over yourselves dreaming up conspiracy theories. Just don't complain when you get laughed at.

[Kathianne]

Not enough information to make any conclusion. As the UK terror details were leaked, many sources are out to undermine the administration.

If proven, which will take much time, if ever, the crime could possibly be espionage, not treason.

[gabosaurus]

Trump isn't going anywhere. You snowflakes can just continue to cream all over yourselves dreaming up conspiracy theories. Just don't complain when you get laughed at.

Thinking Dems don't want Trump to go anywhere. Because the next option is a lot worse. Much better to allow Trump to continue to crumble the GOP ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. :cool:

[Black Diamond]

Thinking Dems don't want Trump to go anywhere. Because the next option is a lot worse. Much better to allow Trump to continue to crumble the GOP ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. :cool:
Remember when you said vote trump get Hillary ?

[jimnyc]

Once again, I'll go with McMaster until I have a reason not to.

---

Trump National Security Adviser ‘Not Concerned’ With Latest Reports About Kushner

National security adviser H.R. McMaster said Saturday that he is “not concerned” with a report alleging that President Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, asked Russia’s ambassador about setting up a secret communications channel with the Kremlin.

“We have backchannel communications with a number of countries,” McMaster said in a press conference in Italy.

“What that allows you to do is communicate in a discreet manner so I’m not concerned.”

Rest here - http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/27/trump-national-security-adviser-not-concerned-with-latest-reports-about-kushner/

[aboutime]

I suppose. All of the typical, whining, hatred filled, insulted, offended, dumb, ignorant Liberals who believe the DAILY DOSE OF FAKE NEWS...Do not remember the RED PHONE,
http://i62.tinypic.com/sfwga1.jpg
secret, direct line installed in the OVAL OFFICE during the LBJ years that connected the KREMLIN with the WHITE HOUSE.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/there-never-was-such-a-thing-as-a-red-phone-in-the-white-house-1129598/
This is nothing new. And since our PRESENT LEADER, PRESIDENT, CIC is concerned with protecting the AMERICAN PEOPLE. Logic, and common sense would seemingly dictate a DIRECT (SECRET)(PRIVATE) LINE.

At least it's not a HILLARY "RESET" BUTTON http://nation.foxnews.com/sites/nation.foxnews.com/files/styles/style592x333/public/hillary%20reset%20button.jpg

[pete311]

According to Politico, "McMaster told American reporters traveling with Trump at the G7 summit in Sicily that the U.S. frequently sets up backchannels to countries for discreet communications." While that is true, it's usually done with knowledge by a select few in the intelligence community. It is alleged that Kushner tried to by-pass normal channels and circumvent those who need to know. Then there is the matter whether or not he was doing it as a private/personal initiative, outside the scrutiny of federal agencies.

[jimnyc]

Suck on this Pete! :)

Even the FBI stated from the beginning that he wasn't a suspect of anything, and it was all part of their investigation, many ran with this story and are trying to press and make more of it than is there. Once again, not a peep of evidence that shows any wrongdoing whatsoever. Funny how that works, no evidence but lets go full force anyway - but when it was Hillary and others, with much much evidence, we were told it was nothing, out of line, a witch hunt, and the Dems and supporters scoffed and wanted nothing to do with it.

The overwhelming majority of the accusations out there about Russia, Trump and Russia, and Trump whatever - are lame accusations and some literally just made up. That's why nothing has stuck. It's getting tiresome, and likely expensive. The good things behind the scenes are being ignored while much is being concentrated on fake scandals. One example - folks, at least on the right, wanted defunding of PP badly. And were pissed at Trump when it didn't happen in a recent funding/budget. But it was recently announced that he has put it on the table for the upcoming budget, so of course it's not a done deal - but it's barely getting a discussion anywhere, and certainly not here.

---

DHS Secretary: A Backchannel Between Trump And Russia ‘Not A Bad Thing’

WASHINGTON ― The secretary of homeland security defended on Sunday reports that President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and close adviser Jared Kushner discussed establishing a secret backchannel between Trump’s transition team and Russian officials, claiming that it was “normal” and “acceptable.”

“Any way that you can communicate with people, particularly organizations that are maybe not particularly friendly to us, is a good thing,” Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told ABC’s Martha Raddatz. “It’s not a bad thing to have multiple communication lines to any government.”

The report, published by The Washington Post late Friday, originated during a previously reported meeting between Kushner and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak in December, before Trump became president. Also present at the meeting was former national security adviser Mike Flynn, who was fired earlier this year for lying to administration officials about discussing sanctions with Russia.

(video at site)

https://i.imgur.com/PBfuNNj.png

https://www.yahoo.com/news/dhs-secretary-backchannel-between-trump-160527914.html

[aboutime]

According to Politico, "McMaster told American reporters traveling with Trump at the G7 summit in Sicily that the U.S. frequently sets up backchannels to countries for discreet communications." While that is true, it's usually done with knowledge by a select few in the intelligence community. It is alleged that Kushner tried to by-pass normal channels and circumvent those who need to know. Then there is the matter whether or not he was doing it as a private/personal initiative, outside the scrutiny of federal agencies.


petey. So tell us? WHY WERE YOU, and OTHER LIBERALS "SO QUIET" WHEN HILLARY HAD HER OWN SERVER, and UNSANCTIONED, UNPROTECTED EMAILS???

[pete311]

petey. So tell us? WHY WERE YOU, and OTHER LIBERALS "SO QUIET" WHEN HILLARY HAD HER OWN SERVER, and UNSANCTIONED, UNPROTECTED EMAILS???


I was not quiet. Away old man, away!

[aboutime]

i was not quiet. Away old man, away!

nope!

[revelarts]

Have to wonder what the response would have been if Obama's brother had requested BACK Channels to Russia, or made offers to Chinese bizmen , Not disclosing the family biz or putting in blind trust etc etc like Trump's family is doing.
What if Hilary were president and Chelsy's husband was doing the same?

I suspect it there wouldn't be 'YAWNS'
and enthusiastic agreement with Administration spokes people's assurances that it's 'A GOOD THING'.

somehow... I just suspect it wouldn't be the same.

[jimnyc]

Have to wonder what the response would have been if Obama's brother had requested BACK Channels to Russia, or made offers to Chinese bizmen , Not disclosing the family biz or putting in blind trust etc etc like Trump's family is doing.
What if Hilary were president and Chelsy's husband was doing the same?

I suspect it there wouldn't be 'YAWNS'
and enthusiastic agreement with Administration spokes people's assurances that it's 'A GOOD THING'.

somehow... I just suspect it wouldn't be the same.

Was Obama's brother working as an advisor in this scenario? And absolutely no wrongdoing whatosever, zilch, nada, outside of him setting up back channel communications which is normal, and apparently used by president after president? Sure, I'm in agreement that you may see some gripes on a conservative board. But I wouldn't be upset with something that has no wrongdoing to it.

All kinds of bellyaching about all kinds of Trump stuff, and nothing amounts to anything that I've seen. Don't like him? I'm cool with that. I'm not looking to change minds, that's for dang sure! I'm just pointing out the lack of wrongdoing and lack of proof/evidence in the various accusations around Trump and his administration.

Perhaps if it were Obama, there would be different responses than you are seeing here. But if the facts were identical in both cases, I would imagine no amount of whining would matter if it ends up with no case in the end, other than unfounded accusations.

Will you accept findings from anyone looking into this? Such as Mueller for starters? While I have the stance I do, none of us have true access to the facts. Intel committee members have all come up empty in all things Russia thus far, but we'll see what Mueller finds. I'm glad he's in there, I think it's necessary for both sides, and for the American people. I do believe though, that there will be some that won't accept any findings.

[jimnyc]

I was not quiet. Away old man, away!

I have to admit, I read a few of these 'away old man' posts last night. I know they're meant in humor, and likely why I was actually laughing when I read them! But I still bet the old navy man would give ya whoopin'! :lol:

[Black Diamond]

Have to wonder what the response would have been if Obama's brother had requested BACK Channels to Russia, or made offers to Chinese bizmen , Not disclosing the family biz or putting in blind trust etc etc like Trump's family is doing.
What if Hilary were president and Chelsy's husband was doing the same?

I suspect it there wouldn't be 'YAWNS'
and enthusiastic agreement with Administration spokes people's assurances that it's 'A GOOD THING'.

somehow... I just suspect it wouldn't be the same.
Both would be drops in the ocean.

[Black Diamond]

I have to admit, I read a few of these 'away old man' posts last night. I know they're meant in humor, and likely why I was actually laughing when I read them! But I still bet the old navy man would give ya whoopin'! :lol:
Easily.

[Black Diamond]

Have to wonder what the response would have been if Obama's brother had requested BACK Channels to Russia, or made offers to Chinese bizmen , Not disclosing the family biz or putting in blind trust etc etc like Trump's family is doing.
What if Hilary were president and Chelsy's husband was doing the same?

I suspect it there wouldn't be 'YAWNS'
and enthusiastic agreement with Administration spokes people's assurances that it's 'A GOOD THING'.

somehow... I just suspect it wouldn't be the same.
You must think JFK was the worst man in history. Or maybe RFK.

[pete311]

Easily.

haha I'm no fighter. I always thought to myself if I got in a serious brawl I'd tell the guy, you'll beat me, maybe even kill me, but I'll put all my soul into making sure I blind you with eye damage or squeeze your balls to pulp. I figure, that would be enough to calm the situation lol :D

[jimnyc]

haha I'm no fighter. I always thought to myself if I got in a serious brawl I'd tell the guy, you'll beat me, maybe even kill me, but I'll put all my soul into making sure I blind you with eye damage or squeeze your balls to pulp. I figure, that would be enough to calm the situation lol :D

When in doubt, and if you KNOW, 100% for sure, and I mean ONE HUNDRED PERCENT sure that you're about to get the ever loving shit kicked out of you by someone far superior, but a jerk that won't listen to any reason whatsoever? REAL quickly in the beginning just drop pants and underwear. BOOM, problem solved. Ain't no self respecting man gonna touch ya. Hey, say what ya will, beats a black eye and a broken nose! LOL

[Kathianne]

As I said earlier, I'm waiting for more information that inevitably will come out. Meanwhile this op ed is something I agree with:

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/29/mccain-putins-bigger-threat-isis/


McCain: Putin’s a bigger threat than ISIS

POSTED AT 12:31 PM ON MAY 29, 2017 BY ED MORRISSEY


Alternate headline: 2012’s calling, and it wants its Romney foreign policy back (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sen-john-mccain-putin-important-threat-isis/story?id=47703934). Just a little over four years after Mitt Romney got ridiculed for calling Russia our greatest geopolitical threat, positions have switched somewhat on the issue. Suddenly Democrats are seeing a Russian behind every tree, and Republicans are downplaying the threat from Vladimir Putin. Well, some Republicans are, but not John McCain — who’s re-upping Romney’s foreign-policy vision:

“I think ISIS can do terrible things, and I worry a lot about what is happening with the Muslim faith, and I worry about a whole lot of things about it,” McCain told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. in an interview today.

“But it is the Russians who are trying, who tried to destroy the very fundamental of democracy, and that is to change the outcome of an American election,” he said, referring to Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

“So I view Vladimir Putin … I view the Russians as the far greatest challenge that we have,” said McCain, who serves as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Yesterday, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly tried to play down reports that Jared Kushner had set up back-channel communication lines with Russia, calling it a normal part of diplomacy (http://nypost.com/2017/05/28/john-kelly-says-kushners-reported-back-channel-attempt-is-no-big-issue/):



“His No. 1 interest, really, is the nation. So you know there’s a lot of different ways to communicate, back channel, publicly with other countries,” Kelly told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/sec-john-kelly-intelligence-leaks-are-darn-close-treason-n765576) “I don’t see any big issue here relative to Jared.” …

“Just because you have a back channel, if indeed that’s what Jared was after, doesn’t mean that he then keeps everything secret,” Kelly said. “… Back channel communications with people are ways to communicate with people, again not in front of the press, as an example, but that information is not necessarily kept secret from the rest of the government.”

The back channel with Russia could actually be a “good thing” as long the White House realizes the information coming in from Russia may be false.
“Any channel of communications – back or otherwise – with a country like Russia is a good thing,” Kelly added on “Fox News Sunday.” “… It doesn’t bother me.”



McCain’s not buying that explanation, he told Australian broadcaster ABC. “I don’t like it,” McCain responded at least indirectly to Kelly:





“I know that some administration officials are saying, ‘Well, that’s standard procedure,’” he elaborated. “I don’t think it is standard procedure prior to the inauguration of a president of the United States by someone who is not in an appointed position.”






NRO’s Andrew McCarthy finds himself much closer to McCain’s position (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448075/jared-kushner-sergey-kislyak-secret-back-channels-russia-amateur-hour). Nothing has yet emerged to suggest that Jared Kushner did anything illegal — but if the intel leaks are true, it’s an example of amateur hour at the White House:






On Sunday, Fox News’s Chris Wallace reported (http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2017/05/28/sec-john-kelly-on-manchester-investigation-keeping-america-safe.html) that his own unidentified Trump-administration source maintains that it was Kislyak, not Kushner, who proposed the back channel for consultations on Syria — and Wallace’s source, too, stresses that the “secure link” was never set up. Meanwhile, even the Post’s own account points out that old Russian hands like Kislyak are notorious for feeding false information into channels they suspect American spies are monitoring. The Kremlin’s goal, we must always bear in mind, is to sow confusion and instability that paralyze our government’s ability to pursue American interests. And man, oh man, is it working like a charm in this case.

But if there is truth to the Post’s account, it would be hard to quantify how galactically stupid making such a proposal to Kislyak would be, although former Bush CIA director Mike Hayden has tried: “Off the map (http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/27/politics/hayden-on-kushner-cnntv/),” he said Saturday.

Let’s stipulate that Kushner, Flynn, and Team Trump had good reason to believe they had lots of enemies in the so-called community of U.S. intelligence agencies — a community politicized by Obama plants, whose leaks have been fueling the “collusion with Russia” narrative since the fall campaign. It would nevertheless be the height of foolishness for Trump transition officials to believe that their discussions with Russian operatives would remain secret from American intelligence. Nor could anything good could have come from an arrangement in which Trump officials put themselves at the tender mercies of Putin’s regime. Russia, to put it mildly, does not have America’s or Trump’s interests at heart. The Kremlin would be certain to humiliate Trump and Kushner by publicly disclosing the talks (or a distorted version of them) the moment doing so seemed expedient.



Whether or not the worst aspects of the Post’s account are true, it appears that this is exactly what the Kremlin has done. Kushner put himself in position to let Kislyak embarrass him. Kushner made himself vulnerable to media-Democrat speculation that he wanted secret dealings with Russia because Trump was having shady dealings with Russia.


Even if nothing comes of the Kushner rumors — and it seems very unlikely that anything will — it’s become apparent that this administration doesn’t take the threat from Russia seriously. That has serious ramifications, too, as the failure this week to fully embrace Article V in the NATO meetings shows. Trump may have a natural inclination to appreciate Russia’s strain of nationalism, but that means something very different in Russia, as its former Soviet republics can attest.

Nothing has really changed since 2012, or since Putin came to power; Russia is our main geopolitical challenge, and they’re not looking for an alliance but a chance to push us to the sidelines around the world. Republicans used to understand this, and hopefully will wake up to it again in time to keep our Western alliances strong enough to keep Russian imperialism contained.

[pete311]

As I said earlier, I'm waiting for more information that inevitably will come out. Meanwhile this op ed is something I agree with:

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/29/mccain-putins-bigger-threat-isis/

ISIS can blow up a cafe. Russia will take entire countries.

[Black Diamond]

McCain is about as much a republican as Pete.

[revelarts]

As I said earlier, I'm waiting for more information that inevitably will come out. Meanwhile this op ed is something I agree with:

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/29/mccain-putins-bigger-threat-isis/

while it's WELL KNOWN that Putin is NOT a good guy.
I question the notion that the U.S. is being PUSHED out of world affiars by him.
Look at the map of NATO expansion . it's Russia that's getting squeezed out of international relations not the U.S..

more recently Russia's/Putin's Friends Khadffi In Libya, and Assad in Syria have been oust or attempt to be ousted by terrorist "REBELS" backed by the U.S.. Iran, another Russian Ally, is also in U.S. Sites.

It's very disingenuous to pretend that Putin is some expansionist monster, ready to devour the earth when Russia only has a shadow of the influence of the former USSR and nearly half or more of the former Warsaw pacts states are now IN NATO with U.S. Missiles pointed at Russia.

bottom line the Russian "threat" real but over blown.
UNLESS you count it's threat to the Gas and Oil industries. THERE they are a threat. Along with Syria and Iran. the pipelines they've proposed are quite a problem.

NATO Expansion MAP


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Map_of_NATO_chronological.gif
SaveSave

[pete311]

McCain is about as much a republican as Pete.

I'm as much of a republican as Trump is.

[Black Diamond]

I'm as much of a republican as Trump is.
In which universe ?

[jimnyc]

A couple more stories I just read. I'll put them into an existing thread AND into one post, so that Gunny need not hunt me down Rambo style and execute me. :)

---

Howard Kurtz: Media May Be Overblowing Kushner Russia Story

The hyperventilating media have thrust Jared Kushner into the spotlight of the ongoing Russia investigation prematurely — perhaps recklessly — despite the lack of evidence suggesting he's a target, Fox News media analyst Howard Kurtz said.

In fact, the only place where President Donald Trump's son-in-law appears as a target is in the media's overblown coverage of this, Kurtz says.

"We're in an overheated period with the media scrutiny of this," Kurtz says. "It may lead to nothing. Jared Kushner is not a target of the investigation but he is clearly the target of the media in a way that makes me a bit uncomfortable."

Being the target of an official investigation is bad news; being the subject of a probe is a step down but still concerning; the media reports on Kushner is that he's the "focus" or "under scrutiny."

"The media are turning up the volume to 11 over The Washington Post and NBC stories reporting that Kushner is a 'focus' or 'under scrutiny' by the FBI," Kurtz says. "But being the focus under scrutiny doesn't sound to me that different than just being a witness."

Kurtz says the media could be casting a cloud of suspicion over a guy who has done nothing wrong.

Rest here - http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/howard-kurtz-jared-kushner-probe-russia/2017/05/30/id/793054/


Krauthammer on Russia-Kushner Ties: ‘I Don’t Trust This Story’ — ‘The Russians Are Leaking It Clearly’

Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Special Report,” Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer reacted to the latest controversy involving the Trump White House, which top Trump aide Jared Kushner is alleged to have had improper back channel communications with the Russian government.

Krauthammer dismissed the controversy and noted the timing of the allegations of the effort to open communications, which are said to have happened during the transition and not the campaign.

“I don’t trust this story,” Krauthammer said. “The Russians are leaking it clearly on a channel they know we’re going to pick up. The Russians are masters of disinformation. They already have Washington with its knickers in a twist with a Russian conspiracy. This is an added twist. Somebody’s going to get a hernia here. I think I’ll stop the metaphor with that point. But we have no idea if it’s true. Let’s say it is true. Isn’t the problem here, the accusation here that there was some collusion during the campaign with the Russians? Well, everyone agrees if the story is true, it occurred after the campaign during the transition. So, unless there’s some sort of nefarious connection here, there’s no connection to what was alleged to have happened during the campaign.”

“And lastly, we’ve had backchannel connections with adversaries for generations,” he added. “Henry Kissinger had them with the Russians and the Chinese. Hillary had a backchannel to establish the opening with the Iranians in what ended up as the opening in what ended up as the Iranian nuclear deal … This happens all the time. I don’t quite understand where is the crime other than it is another piece that has Russia in the headline, Trump people in the headline and thus, it is supposed to be scandalous. Show me.”

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/05/30/krauthammer-on-russia-kushner-ties-i-dont-trust-this-story-the-russians-are-leaking-it-clearly/

[Kathianne]

Jim, I agree with both Krauthammer and Kurtz, it certainly looks like this is 'nothing that hasn't been done or attempted before.' The problem comes as you've said, 'the Russians are likely behind it.'

Certainly looks like they initiated it and grabbed a weak link to try it out on.

Likely nothing more than inexperience showing, though that has its own inherent danger, don't you think?

[jimnyc]

Jim, I agree with both Krauthammer and Kurtz, it certainly looks like this is 'nothing that hasn't been done or attempted before.' The problem comes as you've said, 'the Russians are likely behind it.'

Certainly looks like they initiated it and grabbed a weak link to try it out on.

Likely nothing more than inexperience showing, though that has its own inherent danger, don't you think?

I think perhaps the Russians, and then more so the democrats, and with help of a few insiders, are using illegally obtained information - then they are using that to flimsily make accusations towards Trump and the administration. Accusations, gossip type crap, drama, anything to keep the media circus going.

They need to find the person or persons leaking information. Having information used against you can make any person look stupid/wrong/amateur or whatever the goal of the day is.

If Kushner did nothing wrong at all... no amount of experience is going to help when the shitty liberal media makes it bigger, bigger and bigger everyday, and continues on to make it sound as if he committed treason - when there isn't proof of any type of illegal activity whatsoever. They're smearing him, whoever they are.

I'm not sold on the Russian thing on this one, only for lack of evidence thus far. That doesn't mean I would surprised in the slightest though. But my gut instinct on all of these still lead back to the democrats.

I also have no doubt whatsoever that the Russians have their hands in there somewhere. I don't believe in any collusion type stuff, not at all. But hacking, whether themselves, or information they have garnered, or likely both.

First things first is finding out where the leaks are coming from. And IMO that's going to be quite difficult, and that's because I'm of the opinion that the access is coming from an intel agency. And if so, how do you find that out, and find out who?

[Kathianne]

I think perhaps the Russians, and then more so the democrats, and with help of a few insiders, are using illegally obtained information - then they are using that to flimsily make accusations towards Trump and the administration. Accusations, gossip type crap, drama, anything to keep the media circus going.

They need to find the person or persons leaking information. Having information used against you can make any person look stupid/wrong/amateur or whatever the goal of the day is.

If Kushner did nothing wrong at all... no amount of experience is going to help when the shitty liberal media makes it bigger, bigger and bigger everyday, and continues on to make it sound as if he committed treason - when there isn't proof of any type of illegal activity whatsoever. They're smearing him, whoever they are.

I'm not sold on the Russian thing on this one, only for lack of evidence thus far. That doesn't mean I would surprised in the slightest though. But my gut instinct on all of these still lead back to the democrats.

I also have no doubt whatsoever that the Russians have their hands in there somewhere. I don't believe in any collusion type stuff, not at all. But hacking, whether themselves, or information they have garnered, or likely both.

First things first is finding out where the leaks are coming from. And IMO that's going to be quite difficult, and that's because I'm of the opinion that the access is coming from an intel agency. And if so, how do you find that out, and find out who?

I appreciate your point of view, time will sort this out. One thing that the reports now coming out regarding Obama and FISA is that eventually the story will come out, it just does faster for Republicans, at least up to this point.

[pete311]

Jim, I agree with both Krauthammer and Kurtz, it certainly looks like this is 'nothing that hasn't been done or attempted before.' The problem comes as you've said, 'the Russians are likely behind it.'

Certainly looks like they initiated it and grabbed a weak link to try it out on.

Likely nothing more than inexperience showing, though that has its own inherent danger, don't you think?

Is point of contention is whether he was trying to create a channel outside normal protocols. aka without intel community knowledge. That is not how it's done historically and screams suspicion. Of course it's all speculation. Time will tell.

"Former intelligence officials described Jared Kushner's reported attempt to set up a backchannel line of communication with Russia last December that would bypass the US' national security and intelligence apparatus as "off the map," "explosive," and "extremely dangerous."
http://www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-backchannel-plan-russia-flynn-2017-5

[pete311]

First things first is finding out where the leaks are coming from. And IMO that's going to be quite difficult, and that's because I'm of the opinion that the access is coming from an intel agency. And if so, how do you find that out, and find out who?

Or... you know... you could stop doing the dumb shit that people feel they need to leak to protect the public.

[jimnyc]

I appreciate your point of view, time will sort this out. One thing that the reports now coming out regarding Obama and FISA is that eventually the story will come out, it just does faster for Republicans, at least up to this point.

I just hope they can get to the truth, and do so in a rather quick manner, but without rushing and missing facts. I just don't want to see it consume an entire presidency. And I don't care WHO falls as a result of legal wrongdoing in the end. I just hope it's done factually and on a level field.

[jimnyc]

Or... you know... you could stop doing the dumb shit that people feel they need to leak to protect the public.

They can feel that way all they like, but there has been NOTHING found, Pete. Being a loudmouth on twitter, or doing things YOU think are "dumb shit" doesn't equate to anything illegal in the slightest bit, nor anything that the public needs protection from.

Protect the public? It's asinine crap like that. That's the crap one would hear on MSNBC or CNN and making it sound as if.... when there is NO PROOF of anything, just accusations.

But let the investigation go, seems everyone and anyone agree on that one, for the most part. And when it's done and over, and Trump comes out squeaky clean as I think he will... then I will literally just laugh at that point when people voice such concerns.

For now, let's find out from an independent investigator.

[Kathianne]

I just hope they can get to the truth, and do so in a rather quick manner, but without rushing and missing facts. I just don't want to see it consume an entire presidency. And I don't care WHO falls as a result of legal wrongdoing in the end. I just hope it's done factually and on a level field.


There are many in Congress trying to get Trump to 'compartmentalize' the questions on investigation and those that have to do with policy. Those with investigations? "No comment, you'll have to ask the investigators." Focus on policies and getting things done.

Will he?

[pete311]

They can feel that way all they like, but there has been NOTHING found, Pete. Being a loudmouth on twitter, or doing things YOU think are "dumb shit" doesn't equate to anything illegal in the slightest bit, nor anything that the public needs protection from.

Protect the public? It's asinine crap like that. That's the crap one would hear on MSNBC or CNN and making it sound as if.... when there is NO PROOF of anything, just accusations.

But let the investigation go, seems everyone and anyone agree on that one, for the most part. And when it's done and over, and Trump comes out squeaky clean as I think he will... then I will literally just laugh at that point when people voice such concerns.

For now, let's find out from an independent investigator.

Yes let's find out... in the meantime you can stop claiming nothing found and no proof. Wait for the investigation to conclude.

[jimnyc]

Yes let's find out... in the meantime you can stop claiming nothing found and no proof. Wait for the investigation to conclude.

I have no problem at all doing just that - if the MSM and folks like yourself would reign it in a bit and stop running around as if Trump committed treason somehow.

[Black Diamond]

Yes let's find out... in the meantime you can stop claiming nothing found and no proof. Wait for the investigation to conclude.
Obama was born in Kenya.

[pete311]

Obama was born in Kenya.

Ted's dad killed JFK.

[aboutime]

Yes let's find out... in the meantime you can stop claiming nothing found and no proof. Wait for the investigation to conclude.


petey. You really SHOULD pay attention to YOUR OWN WORDS for once. Go back and actually read some of your posts on this, and other threads. Your hypocrisy precedes you.

[aboutime]

http://youtu.be/dE84LRhAe6E

[pete311]

petey. You really SHOULD pay attention to YOUR OWN WORDS for once. Go back and actually read some of your posts on this, and other threads. Your hypocrisy precedes you.

away old man, away!

[BoogyMan]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html

It is only treason if you are a dolt with no knowledge of history? How do you think we communicated with Russia during the blockade of Cuba?

Read something for goodness sake. The sheer lack of knowledge is unprecedentedly goofy.

[Black Diamond]

It is only treason if you are a dolt with no knowledge of history? How do you think we communicated with Russia during the blockade of Cuba?

Read something for goodness sake. The sheer lack of knowledge is unprecedentedly goofy.
I always thought Kennedy was a traitor.

[jimnyc]

Another example of a liberal loony MSM going overboard about something he has no evidence to support.

---

Keith Olbermann Calls For Jared Kushner’s Arrest

In the newest installment of “The Resistance,” Keith Olbermann’s political soapbox-style web-series on Condé Nast darling GQ, the former sports commentator called for Jared Kushner’s arrest.

“I call for the immediate arrest of Jared Kushner,” Olbermann demanded, staring deadpan into the camera behind his signature navy spectacles. “If he should not be suspected of money-launder, racketeering, and influence peddling, then he should be suspected of obstruction of justice and espionage.”

Olbermann cited 18 U.S. Code § 794, which states that anyone convicted of violating such federal law, “shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life,” before listing off a Rolodex of “traitors to this country,” referring to Ivanka Trump as “[Kushner’s] wife” in what could be surmised as a sexist double-standard when it comes to women in the Republican Party.

“These people do not believe in the law, these people do not believe in patriotism, these people do not believe in the United States of America,” Olbermann ranted. “These people — Kushner, his wife, Trump, General Allen, General McMaster, General Flynn, the others — are in their souls, if not under the law, traitors to this country.”

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/31/keith-olbermann-calls-for-jared-kushners-arrest-video/

[pete311]

It is only treason if you are a dolt with no knowledge of history? How do you think we communicated with Russia during the blockade of Cuba?

Read something for goodness sake. The sheer lack of knowledge is unprecedentedly goofy.

You apparently, haven't read what exactly the issue is. It's not the fact of back door communications. So go away, read up on the actual point of contention is and then get back to me.

[Gunny]

You apparently, haven't read what exactly the issue is. It's not the fact of back door communications. So go away, read up on the actual point of contention is and then get back to me.W know. He didn't go through the "usual channels" Meaning the Washington Post and NYT and the rest of the leftwing MSM were left out of the loop.

I'll work on a tear for ya.:laugh:

[jimnyc]

You apparently, haven't read what exactly the issue is. It's not the fact of back door communications. So go away, read up on the actual point of contention is and then get back to me.

The back door communications apparently have been going on since forever. What if anything illegal has been done here?

[Black Diamond]

The back door communications apparently have been going on since forever. What if anything illegal has been done here?
Having a wife with maiden name trump.

[jimnyc]

Having a wife with maiden name trump.

And she's HOT! :beer:

[BoogyMan]

You apparently, haven't read what exactly the issue is. It's not the fact of back door communications. So go away, read up on the actual point of contention is and then get back to me.

Yeah, I read the actual issue and it is no different than any other back channel from history. Also, the original was anonymously sourced and there is now contention that the Kislyak was the one requesting back channel and that it was for a single discussion of the Syrian issue.

[pete311]

Yeah, I read the actual issue and it is no different than any other back channel from history. Also, the original was anonymously sourced and there is now contention that the Kislyak was the one requesting back channel and that it was for a single discussion of the Syrian issue.

The difference was it attempted to circumvent the intelligence communities.

[jimnyc]

The difference was it attempted to circumvent the intelligence communities.

Prove/show that this back channel communications attempt was any/so much different than others have done in the past. Please provide references, citations, facts, and why you believe this is illegal, and illegal with supporting documentation.

[Black Diamond]

And she's HOT! :beer:
Quite.

[pete311]

Prove/show that this back channel communications attempt was any/so much different than others have done in the past. Please provide references, citations, facts, and why you believe this is illegal, and illegal with supporting documentation.

ahem, that is what the investigation is for. I'll leave it to the FBI.

[jimnyc]

The difference was it attempted to circumvent the intelligence communities.


Prove/show that this back channel communications attempt was any/so much different than others have done in the past. Please provide references, citations, facts, and why you believe this is illegal, and illegal with supporting documentation.


ahem, that is what the investigation is for. I'll leave it to the FBI.

In other words, you're spouting on about the differences in this communications - but don't have anything to base it on - other than your opinion/hopes, and the future investigation. :laugh:

[pete311]

In other words, you're spouting on about the differences in this communications - but don't have anything to base it on - other than your opinion/hopes, and the future investigation. :laugh:

The difference was claimed in news reports. I'll let the investigation substantiate. Nothing more I can say.

[jimnyc]

The difference was claimed in news reports. I'll let the investigation substantiate. Nothing more I can say.

Can you at least post these reports that show reputable citations of illegal activity?

[pete311]

Can you at least post these reports that show reputable citations of illegal activity?

When did I say he did anything illegal? That is for the investigation to conclude. What we do know is he may have done something irregular and good overview means a review is in order. USA Today thought he may have violated the Logan Act.

[jimnyc]

When did I say he did anything illegal? That is for the investigation to conclude. What we do know is he may have done something irregular and good overview means a review is in order. USA Today thought he may have violated the Logan Act.

If nothing illegal, then there's nothing to see here, and the communications are aok. For the investigation to have any bite, he would have to had violated the law in some manner. Otherwise, what's the point of accusations?

[aboutime]

ahem, that is what the investigation is for. I'll leave it to the FBI.


NO petey. You don't get away with that excuse again. YOU STATED differently, and now say you will leave it to the FBI?? Hypocrisy is your game, and your standard.
Like most other Liberals who say things intentionally, then instantly pretend they are SORRY, and APOLOGIZE for their (wink, wink) mistakes??

[pete311]

If nothing illegal, then there's nothing to see here, and the communications are aok. For the investigation to have any bite, he would have to had violated the law in some manner. Otherwise, what's the point of accusations?

I have nothing more to say. We'll find out eventually.

[aboutime]

I have nothing more to say. We'll find out eventually.



Now that's really funny petey. You've never really had anything to say in the first place. Liberals only make up stuff, lie, and blame others for their stupidity.

[jimnyc]

I have nothing more to say. We'll find out eventually.

Cheap way out once you make comments, to not stand behind them.... but ok.

[pete311]

Cheap way out once you make comments, to not stand behind them.... but ok.
Questions that I can't answer and it doesn't matter what I think. Other intel people think it's worth investigating. They are smarter than us. Leave the conclusion to them.

[jimnyc]

Questions that I can't answer and it doesn't matter what I think. Other intel people think it's worth investigating. They are smarter than us. Leave the conclusion to them.

No one is smarter than I am Pete. I just choose to be a bum, and use my superior IQ, to hang out and win debates on DP.

So eff off! :)

[pete311]

No one is smarter than I am Pete. I just choose to be a bum, and use my superior IQ, to hang out and win debates on DP.

So eff off! :)

I have no doubt intel communities are watching DP for ideas and feedback :)

[aboutime]

Questions that I can't answer and it doesn't matter what I think. Other intel people think it's worth investigating. They are smarter than us. Leave the conclusion to them.


petey. Back with more excuses, excuses, excuses...http://icansayit.com/images/excuses.jpg

[jimnyc]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html

Treason you say? Let's hear how you feel now, Pete, will you remain consistent?

[jimnyc]

Not treasonous. But certainly not law abiding. Then again, it appears that anyone connected with the Trump family or administration is above the law.

Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal.

So you believe it was against the law.

So who broke the law on the dem side and should see some prison bars? :)

[Black Diamond]

Treason you say? Let's hear how you feel now, Pete, will you remain consistent?
Let's see where mueller leads us. :laugh:

[PostmodernProphet]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html
he should have just borrowed Hilliary's.....

[BoogyMan]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html

Was it treason when the back channel with Russia helped to stop the Cuban missile crisis? Most moronic assumptive horse crap I have heard in quite a while.

[Black Diamond]

Was it treason when the back channel with Russia helped to stop the Cuban missile crisis? Most moronic assumptive horse crap I have heard in quite a while.
I think that may have Bobby's idea. Nepotism.

[Black Diamond]

So the back channel is treason but giving Russia loads of uranium isn't.

[Gunny]

So the back channel is treason but giving Russia loads of uranium isn't.SO, having a back channel with "Russia" (a foreign country) is treason? The answer to the assertion that someone is trying to get around the intel community is a big "So what?". That's not illegal. Not smart, but not illegal.

Treason is hard as Hell to prove the bar is so high and rightfully so.

[Black Diamond]

SO, having a back channel with "Russia" (a foreign country) is treason? The answer to the assertion that someone is trying to get around the intel community is a big "So what?". That's not illegal. Not smart, but not illegal.

Treason is hard as Hell to prove the bar is so high and rightfully so.
Yeah. It's that time of the week again for petey. His dreams of the trumps being Rosenberged are not coming to fruition. But he has the audacity of hope.

[Gunny]

Yeah. It's that time of the week again for petey. His dreams of the trumps being Rosenberged are not coming to fruition. But he has the audacity of hope.I take it nothing happened?

I'm supposed to be able to call anywhere in the World on my cell. Might have to check that out. See how long it takes before the black helicopters are flying over the house :laugh:

[aboutime]

I take it nothing happened?

I'm supposed to be able to call anywhere in the World on my cell. Might have to check that out. See how long it takes before the black helicopters are flying over the house :laugh:


Gunny. Let's beat petey to the punch and fly over his house first!:laugh:
<img src="https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg">
<img src="https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg">
<img src="https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg">
<img src="https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg">

[Black Diamond]

Gunny. Let's beat petey to the punch and fly over his house first!:laugh:
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkPQqygoA8YaTRuQntj9hEXQ4x8mibO bNaPtGeX_JWinfuvPjMNg
All named after Indians.

[NightTrain]

You might not need any fire if the smoke is suffocating. This is treason.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-russia-new-report-alleges.html


Yes let's find out... in the meantime you can stop claiming nothing found and no proof. Wait for the investigation to conclude.


Not treasonous. But certainly not law abiding. Then again, it appears that anyone connected with the Trump family or administration is above the law.

Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal.


Thinking Dems don't want Trump to go anywhere. Because the next option is a lot worse. Much better to allow Trump to continue to crumble the GOP ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. :cool:


I'm as much of a republican as Trump is.


Is point of contention is whether he was trying to create a channel outside normal protocols. aka without intel community knowledge. That is not how it's done historically and screams suspicion. Of course it's all speculation. Time will tell.


The difference was it attempted to circumvent the intelligence communities.


I have nothing more to say. We'll find out eventually.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=10966&stc=1


Treason you say? Let's hear how you feel now, Pete, will you remain consistent?

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=10967&stc=1