Russian ambassador told Moscow that Kushner wanted secret communications channel with Kremlin

[AUUSN 823]

Jared Kushner and Russia’s ambassador to Washington discussed the possibility of setting up a secret and secure communications channel between Trump’s transition team and the Kremlin, using Russian diplomatic facilities in an apparent move to shield their pre-inauguration discussions from monitoring, according to U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak reported to his superiors in Moscow that Kushner, son-in-law and confidant to then-President-elect Trump, made the proposal during a meeting on Dec. 1 or 2 at Trump Tower, according to intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials. Kislyak said Kushner suggested using Russian diplomatic facilities in the United States for the communications.

The meeting also was attended by Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-ambassador-told-moscow-that-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-kremlin/2017/05/26/520a14b4-422d-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.740709fc7f28

[AUUSN 823]

 

[AUUSN 823]

 

[AUUSN 823]

 

[AUUSN 823]

 

[AUFAN78 3,889]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-26/wapo-reports-kushner-sought-secret-back-channel-moscow-admits-its-normal-practice

[AUDub 11,131]

12 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-26/wapo-reports-kushner-sought-secret-back-channel-moscow-admits-its-normal-practice

Alt-news bull****. Using the diplomatic communication channels of a foreign nation to avoid detection by the intelligence agencies of the nation in which you reside is not normal practice, Durden, you blithering idiot!

[quietfan 233]

12 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-26/wapo-reports-kushner-sought-secret-back-channel-moscow-admits-its-normal-practice

 

Quote

 

But it’s important to keep in mind two crucial facts that WaPo decided to bury further in their "reporting."

Quote

First, this alleged discussion occurred during a meeting at Trump Tower in early December, nearly a month after Trump’s upset victory over Hillary Clinton.  The investigations being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the House and the Senate are focused on uncovering evidence of collusion between Trump associates and the Russian government during the campaign.
 
And second, if it weren’t for the implications (that this is evidence of collusion between a close Trump associated and Moscow), this would be a non-story, as WaPo readily admits, 16 paragraphs deep: “It is common for senior advisers of a newly elected president to be in contact with foreign leaders and officials. But new administrations are generally cautious in their handling of interactions with Moscow, which U.S. intelligence agencies have accused of waging an unprecedented campaign to interfere in last year’s presidential race and help elect Trump.”

So, to summarize - after Trump won the election (thus not before the election and not showing any election-tampering collusion), Kushner began discussions with the US representative of another world super-power to set up the back-channel-communications that are standard when any new president is elected.

 

1. Special Prosecutor Mueller's assignment: To "oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election, and related matters." per DAG Rod Rosenstein.  No calendar restrictions attached, and "related matters" could very well include Russian contacts after the election.  Kushner and the Russian Ambassador could very well have still been talking about any pre-election collusion in December, or perhaps be talking about any expected 'quid pro quo' after Russia did its part on election hacking.  (Not saying they did, simply saying the December conversation would still fall under the purview of Mueller's mandate.)

2. Wa Po says “It is common for senior advisers of a newly elected president to be in contact with foreign leaders and officials".  It never says that 'back-channel-communications', i.e., setting up a secret communication network outside of normal channels in an attempt to avoid normal oversight, are 'standard'.  In fact, Durden's very use of the term 'back-channel-communications' would imply communications outside normal standard channels.

Tyler Durden's arguments regarding date and 'normal' contact are based on false assumptions.

 

[TexasTiger 12,798]

15 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-26/wapo-reports-kushner-sought-secret-back-channel-moscow-admits-its-normal-practice

Don't embarrass yourself.

[TexasTiger 12,798]

 

 

Rick Wilson @TheRickWilson

If Hillary Clinton's son-in-law wanted secret back channel comms with the Russians, I and every other GOPer would be going full nuclear.8:28 AM · May 27, 2017

[AUUSN 823]

Jared was a cockeyed optimist who got himself mixed up in the high stakes game of world diplomacy & international intrigue.

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

2 hours ago, AUUSN said:

Jared was a cockeyed optimist who got himself mixed up in the high stakes game of world diplomacy & international intrigue.

Sounds like a Bond movie.  WAPO reaching to the bottom of the bait well now. 

[AUUSN 823]

1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said:

Sounds like a Bond movie.  WAPO reaching to the bottom of the bait well now. 

Poor Salty doesn't get the reference. ?

[augolf1716 21,093]

1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said:

Sounds like a Bond movie.  WAPO reaching to the bottom of the bait well now. 

My name is Jared 

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

19 minutes ago, AUUSN said:

Poor Salty doesn't get the reference. ?

sorry  

[augolf1716 21,093]

8 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

sorry  

you didn't get the memo??

[AUUSN 823]

10 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

sorry  

 

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

11 minutes ago, augolf1716 said:

you didn't get the memo??

no sir but i did see a bull shark today. No Russians though.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Don't embarrass yourself.

You need not worry. Unlike your "likes" I will not simply accept MSM reporting.  There are still those among us, albeit fewer every day, who at the very least accept there are two sides to a story and will not abide by partisan thought. 

[AUDub 11,131]

8 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

You need not worry. Unlike your "likes" I will not simply accept MSM reporting.  There are still those among us, albeit fewer every day, who at the very least accept there are two sides to a story and will not abide by partisan thought. 

Linking ZeroHedge as a counterpoint reveals a lack of ability to think critically. You're embarrassing yourself.

[homersapien 11,352]

9 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

You need not worry. Unlike your "likes" I will not simply accept MSM reporting.  There are still those among us, albeit fewer every day, who at the very least accept there are two sides to a story and will not abide by partisan thought. 

[AU64 10,122]

Critical thinking would cause one to wonder..."who benefits" from leaks of this kind that are guaranteed to stir more distrust and confusion in our intelligence agencies and our government and with our allies ?       Why the Russians of course,,,among others.   And in this case,  who better to spread stuff like this ...which is totally meaningless since "back channels" are common and the US has such "connections" with many governments.

What's embarrassing is to find so many people who are devoid of not just critical thinking...but who apparently do no thinking at all....who totally fail to consider the "who benefits" angle and instead jump to the desired conclusions without even considering that they are being played.    Sorry but those are the ones who are embarrassing themselves....maybe not Lenin's  useful idiots....but some are pretty close to it. JMO

It was not wise of Kushner to do this but I do give him somewhat of a break since this was in Dec before he understood the passion of the Dems and other anti-Trump people who will go to about any lengths in attempts to damage Trump.   Some are even willing to damage our nation's intelligence services and national security...and damage relations with key allies.....re the "leaked" information about the recent Manchester attack....whatever it takes...and no matter they collateral damage.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

2 hours ago, Bigbens42 said:

Linking ZeroHedge as a counterpoint reveals a lack of ability to think critically. You're embarrassing yourself.

BS. That it doesn't represent ones political bias is truly not my problem. 

[AUFAN78 3,889]

1 hour ago, AU64 said:

Critical thinking would cause one to wonder..."who benefits" from leaks of this kind that are guaranteed to stir more distrust and confusion in our intelligence agencies and our government and with our allies ?       Why the Russians of course,,,among others.   And in this case,  who better to spread stuff like this ...which is totally meaningless since "back channels" are common and the US has such "connections" with many governments.

What's embarrassing is to find so many people who are devoid of not just critical thinking...but who apparently do no thinking at all....who totally fail to consider the "who benefits" angle and instead jump to the desired conclusions without even considering that they are being played.    Sorry but those are the ones who are embarrassing themselves....maybe not Lenin's  useful idiots....but some are pretty close to it. JMO

It was not wise of Kushner to do this but I do give him somewhat of a break since this was in Dec before he understood the passion of the Dems and other anti-Trump people who will go to about any lengths in attempts to damage Trump.   Some are even willing to damage our nation's intelligence services and national security...and damage relations with key allies.....re the "leaked" information about the recent Manchester attack....whatever it takes...and no matter they collateral damage.

Knocked it out of the  park. Well done sir.

[homersapien 11,352]

Yeah, it's all about Democrats and others who "will go to any about any lengths to damage Trump".

Trump himself has nothing to do with his problems.  

That's not critical thinking, that's denial plain and simple.