Сделаем Америку снова великой! Trump - Russia megathread

[Skjellyfetti]

Jared Kushner Now Under FBI Scrutiny in Russia Probe, Say Officials

Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and one of his senior advisers, has come under FBI scrutiny in the Russia investigation, multiple U.S. officials told NBC News.

Investigators believe Kushner has significant information relevant to their inquiry, officials said. That does not mean they suspect him of a crime or intend to charge him.

The FBI's scrutiny of Kushner places the bureau's sprawling counterintelligence and criminal investigation not only on the doorstep of the White House, but on the cusp of the Trump family circle. The Washington Post first reported last week that a senior White House official close to Trump was a "person of interest," but did not name the person. The term "person of interest" has no legal meaning.

The officials said Kushner is in a different category from former Trump aides Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn, who are formally considered subjects of the investigation. Records of both Manafort and Flynn have been demanded by grand jury subpoenas, NBC News has reported.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jar ... ls-n764826

[BDKJMU]

Jared Kushner Now Under FBI Scrutiny in Russia Probe, Say Officials

Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and one of his senior advisers, has come under FBI scrutiny in the Russia investigation, multiple U.S. officials told NBC News.

Investigators believe Kushner has significant information relevant to their inquiry, officials said. That does not mean they suspect him of a crime or intend to charge him.

The FBI's scrutiny of Kushner places the bureau's sprawling counterintelligence and criminal investigation not only on the doorstep of the White House, but on the cusp of the Trump family circle. The Washington Post first reported last week that a senior White House official close to Trump was a "person of interest," but did not name the person. The term "person of interest" has no legal meaning.

The officials said Kushner is in a different category from former Trump aides Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn, who are formally considered subjects of the investigation. Records of both Manafort and Flynn have been demanded by grand jury subpoenas, NBC News has reported.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jar ... ls-n764826

Who are these so called 'officials'?

[Skjellyfetti]

Probably Bannon and Cohn throwing shade at their arch nemesis.

Seems they've been in a leak war for a few months now
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/roger ... le/2619325
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/04/ ... -civil-war

[BDKJMU]

Probably Bannon and Cohn throwing shade at their arch nemesis.

Seems they've been in a leak war for a few months now
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/roger ... le/2619325
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/04/ ... -civil-war

Wake me up when there is something concrete like names, publications of actual alleged docs, etc. All we've had for months is 'anonymous', 'unnamed', 'alleged', 'officials', etc.

[Skjellyfetti]

It will be awhile. Keep asleep, though. Noone will miss you.

[BDKJMU]

It will be awhile. Keep asleep, though. Noone will miss you.

Neither would anyone your pages of cut and pastes every day...

[BDKJMU]

Inside The President's Secret Outreach to Russia
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles ... -to-russia

[Skjellyfetti]

I assume this is in response to the Reuters and WaPo stories from Friday about Kushner's backchannel with Russia that I wasn't able to post over the weekend. [ edit: And, now I see this is Drudge's headline this morning. ]

If so, you're missing the point of both of those stories.

Backchannels aren't necessarily improper. They're usually to circumvent the press. They've probably been used by every modern president to conduct negotiations in the background. Your article says Obama's backchannel "included dozens of meetings and input from the State Department, Defense Department and several other agencies."

Kushner appears to have been trying to use Russian embassy resources to circumvent the US government and intelligence agencies. THAT'S the story.

And, to preempt your inevitable response of "Deep State! Kushner has to avoid Obama moles in IC!!!" So, trusting the Russian IC over the US IC. Ok...

[Skjellyfetti]

Kushner's got a lot of explaining to do.

Why secretly meet with sanctioned Kremlin-owned bank that has previously been caught running a spy ring in NYC?
- WH argues it was part of establishing diplomatic channels, Gorkov says it was strictly business. Why different stories?

And, why leave these meetings off your SF 86 forms? These were hardly minor meetings - and, as someone with no prior foreign policy experience... it's hard to imagine these meetings wouldn't have left an impression.

Why leave over a BILLION dollars in loans off of financial disclosures?

Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, was looking for a direct line to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia — a search that in mid-December found him in a room with a Russian banker whose financial institution was deeply intertwined with Russian intelligence, and remains under sanction by the United States.

Federal and congressional investigators are now examining what exactly Mr. Kushner and the Russian banker, Sergey N. Gorkov, wanted from each other. The banker is a close associate of Mr. Putin, but he has not been known to play a diplomatic role for the Russian leader. That has raised questions about why he was meeting with Mr. Kushner at a crucial moment in the presidential transition, according to current and former officials familiar with the investigations.

The New York Times first reported the meeting between Mr. Kushner and Mr. Gorkov in March, but the White House at the time did not explain its aim. That article quoted a White House spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, who said that the meeting came at the request of the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey I. Kislyak, with whom Mr. Kushner had met earlier in December at Trump Tower to discuss opening a communications channel with Russian officials during the presidential transition.

But the half-hour meeting with Mr. Gorkov since has come under increasing scrutiny. The current and former American officials now say it may have been part of an effort by Mr. Kushner to establish a direct line to Mr. Putin outside of established diplomatic channels.

During the Trump administration’s first week, administration officials said they were considering an executive order to unilaterally lift the sanctions, which bar Americans from providing financing to and could limit borrowing from Mr. Gorkov’s bank, Vnesheconombank. Removing the sanctions would have greatly expanded the bank’s ability to do business in the United States.

The meeting with Mr. Gorkov is now being scrutinized by the F.B.I. as part of its investigation into alleged Russian attempts to disrupt last year’s presidential campaign, and whether any of Mr. Trump’s advisers assisted in such efforts.

His bank is controlled by members of Mr. Putin’s government, including Prime Minister Dmitri A. Medvedev. It also has long been intertwined with Mr. Putin’s inner circle: It has been used by the Russian government to bail out oligarchs close to Mr. Putin, and has helped fund the Russian president’s pet projects, such as the Winter Olympics in Sochi in 2014.

Vnesheconombank has also been used by Russian intelligence to plant spies in the United States. In March 2016, an agent of Russia’s foreign intelligence service, known as the S.V.R., who was caught posing as an employee of the bank in New York, pleaded guilty to spying against the United States.

The spy, said Preet Bharara, then the United States attorney in Manhattan, was under “the guise of being a legitimate banker, gathered intelligence as an agent of the Russian Federation in New York.”

Mr. Gorkov is a graduate of the academy of the Federal Security Service of Russia, a training ground for Russian spies. Though current and former Americans said it was unlikely that Mr. Gorkov is an active member of Russian intelligence, they said his past ties to the security services in Moscow were a reason he was put in charge of the bank.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/us/p ... ation.html

[BDKJMU]

Wa Po pushing more fake news? Their 'source' is saying one thing, and FNC 'source' saying different..

"Jared Kushner didn't suggest Russian communications channel in meeting, source says

A December meeting between Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and one of the senior advisers in the Trump administration, and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak at Trump Tower focused on Syria, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Monday.

During the meeting the Russians broached the idea of using a secure line between the Trump administration and Russia, not Kushner, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News. That follows a recent report from The Washington Post alleging that Kushner wanted to develop a secure, private line with Russia.

The idea of a permanent back channel was never discussed, according to the source. Instead, only a one-off for a call about Syria was raised in the conversation.

In addition, the source told Fox News the December meeting focused on Russia's contention that the Obama administration's policy on Syria was deeply flawed.

Details of the meeting follow a NBC report that Kushner, who is married to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, is currently under FBI scrutiny as part of the investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Kushner suggested the use of Russian diplomatic facilities as a way to shield pre-inauguration discussions with Kislyak from monitoring, according to The Post.

Kislyak allegedly then relayed the suggestion to his superiors in Moscow. That was based on intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials, although neither the meeting nor the communications of the Americans involved were under U.S. surveillance, officials told the Post.

The source has told Fox News that Kushner is eager to tell Congress about the meeting and any others of interest."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05 ... -says.html

[Skjellyfetti]

Fox's source sounds like Kushner.

Good thing he's practicing getting his story straight.

Bobby Mueller will be knocking on his door to depose him before long.




Also, hard to play the "JAIL THE LEAKERS" angle at the same time as playing the "FAKE NEWS!!" angle.

[Ibanez]

Wa Po pushing more fake news? Their 'source' is saying one thing, and FNC 'source' saying different..

"Jared Kushner didn't suggest Russian communications channel in meeting, source says

A December meeting between Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and one of the senior advisers in the Trump administration, and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak at Trump Tower focused on Syria, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Monday.

During the meeting the Russians broached the idea of using a secure line between the Trump administration and Russia, not Kushner, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News. That follows a recent report from The Washington Post alleging that Kushner wanted to develop a secure, private line with Russia.

The idea of a permanent back channel was never discussed, according to the source. Instead, only a one-off for a call about Syria was raised in the conversation.

In addition, the source told Fox News the December meeting focused on Russia's contention that the Obama administration's policy on Syria was deeply flawed.

Details of the meeting follow a NBC report that Kushner, who is married to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, is currently under FBI scrutiny as part of the investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Kushner suggested the use of Russian diplomatic facilities as a way to shield pre-inauguration discussions with Kislyak from monitoring, according to The Post.

Kislyak allegedly then relayed the suggestion to his superiors in Moscow. That was based on intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials, although neither the meeting nor the communications of the Americans involved were under U.S. surveillance, officials told the Post.

The source has told Fox News that Kushner is eager to tell Congress about the meeting and any others of interest."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05 ... -says.html

Is it really fake news or just two biased media companies printing a story with their bias??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Fox's source sounds like Kushner.

Good thing he's practicing getting his story straight.

Bobby Mueller will be knocking on his door to depose him before long.

Also, hard to play the "JAIL THE LEAKERS" angle at the same time as playing the "FAKE NEWS!!" angle.

Is a greater chance that the WaPo source is a holdover Obama loyalist..

[Skjellyfetti]

WaPo has multiple sources. It's a good way to tell a piece of investigative journalism from access journalism. They're not going to run the story based on one source like your Fox fluff piece. They verify it with other sources.

But, you're right. Maybe it is just a Deep State conspiracy!! But, again, BDK... it means you have to choose. "FAKE NEWS" or "JAIL THE LEAKERS."

[CAA Flagship]

WaPo has multiple sources. It's a good way to tell a piece of investigative journalism from access journalism. They're not going to run the story based on one source like your Fox fluff piece. They verify it with other sources.

But, you're right. Maybe it is just a Deep State conspiracy!! But, again, BDK... it means you have to choose. "FAKE NEWS" or "JAIL THE LEAKERS."

Did they name any of these "sources" yet?

[Skjellyfetti]

For the Fox story? Like I said, it reads to me like it's Kushner himself. But, I don't know - was Flynn the only other American at the meeting? So, sounds like the source is one of perhaps 2 people.

For the WaPo story? No, they haven't. And, they likely never will unless their sources give them the ok. Thank you, First Amendment!

[Ibanez]

Fox's source sounds like Kushner.

Good thing he's practicing getting his story straight.

Bobby Mueller will be knocking on his door to depose him before long.

Also, hard to play the "JAIL THE LEAKERS" angle at the same time as playing the "FAKE NEWS!!" angle.

Is a greater chance that the WaPo source is a holdover Obama loyalist..

This isn't directed primarily at you but damn...we're a cynical bunch. People don't trust news sources that don't align with them politically. Read multiple sources!!!!!!

[Skjellyfetti]

Leaks / Fake News coming hot and heavy

Russian government officials discussed having potentially "derogatory" information about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and some of his top aides in conversations intercepted by US intelligence during the 2016 election, according to two former intelligence officials and a congressional source.

One source described the information as financial in nature and said the discussion centered on whether the Russians had leverage over Trump's inner circle. The source said the intercepted communications suggested to US intelligence that Russians believed "they had the ability to influence the administration through the derogatory information."

But the sources, privy to the descriptions of the communications written by US intelligence, cautioned the Russian claims to one another "could have been exaggerated or even made up" as part of a disinformation campaign that the Russians did during the election.

The details of the communication shed new light on information US intelligence received about Russian claims of influence. The contents of the conversations made clear to US officials that Russia was considering ways to influence the election -- even if their claims turned out to be false.

None of the sources would say which specific Trump aides were discussed. One of the officials said the intelligence report masked the American names but it was clear the conversations revolved around the Trump campaign team. Another source would not give more specifics, citing the classified nature of the information.

White House response reads like BDK having a hard time choosing to hit the "Fake News" button or the "dangerous leaks" button.

"This is yet another round of false and unverified claims made by anonymous sources to smear the President. The reality is, a review of the President's income from the last ten years showed he had virtually no financial ties at all. There appears to be no limit to which the President's political opponents will go to perpetuate this false narrative, including illegally leaking classified material. All this does is play into the hands of our adversaries and put our country at risk."

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/30/polit ... formation/

[Ibanez]

So...Romney was right in 2012?

[GannonFan]

Leaks / Fake News coming hot and heavy

Russian government officials discussed having potentially "derogatory" information about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and some of his top aides in conversations intercepted by US intelligence during the 2016 election, according to two former intelligence officials and a congressional source.

One source described the information as financial in nature and said the discussion centered on whether the Russians had leverage over Trump's inner circle. The source said the intercepted communications suggested to US intelligence that Russians believed "they had the ability to influence the administration through the derogatory information."

But the sources, privy to the descriptions of the communications written by US intelligence, cautioned the Russian claims to one another "could have been exaggerated or even made up" as part of a disinformation campaign that the Russians did during the election.

The details of the communication shed new light on information US intelligence received about Russian claims of influence. The contents of the conversations made clear to US officials that Russia was considering ways to influence the election -- even if their claims turned out to be false.

None of the sources would say which specific Trump aides were discussed. One of the officials said the intelligence report masked the American names but it was clear the conversations revolved around the Trump campaign team. Another source would not give more specifics, citing the classified nature of the information.

White House response reads like BDK having a hard time choosing to hit the "Fake News" button or the "dangerous leaks" button.

"This is yet another round of false and unverified claims made by anonymous sources to smear the President. The reality is, a review of the President's income from the last ten years showed he had virtually no financial ties at all. There appears to be no limit to which the President's political opponents will go to perpetuate this false narrative, including illegally leaking classified material. All this does is play into the hands of our adversaries and put our country at risk."

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/30/polit ... formation/

Impartial question, but why can't it be both, why does it have to be one or the other? Depending on what is leaked, why can't it be misleading (i.e. fake) in terms of what it implies, and why can't it also be illegally leaked? Take the Kushner back channel to Russia story - is there anything particularly illegal about back channel communications with another government? Heck, one could argue the installation of the red phone in the White House and the Kremlin back in the days of the Cold War was a version of this. Granted, it may point to something more nefarious and potentially illegal, but there's no evidence of that at this time. Most stories tie this in with alleged collusion in fixing an election (again, no evidence of such a thing at this point, at least publically) so it's certainly opinionated at this time, and of course since we know about it, it was leaked.

[Ibanez]

Leaks / Fake News coming hot and heavy




White House response reads like BDK having a hard time choosing to hit the "Fake News" button or the "dangerous leaks" button.



http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/30/polit ... formation/

Impartial question, but why can't it be both, why does it have to be one or the other? Depending on what is leaked, why can't it be misleading (i.e. fake) in terms of what it implies, and why can't it also be illegally leaked? Take the Kushner back channel to Russia story - is there anything particularly illegal about back channel communications with another government? Heck, one could argue the installation of the red phone in the White House and the Kremlin back in the days of the Cold War was a version of this. Granted, it may point to something more nefarious and potentially illegal, but there's no evidence of that at this time. Most stories tie this in with alleged collusion in fixing an election (again, no evidence of such a thing at this point, at least publically) so it's certainly opinionated at this time, and of course since we know about it, it was leaked.

There's a huge difference between the Red Phone between two world leaders and the allegations against the President Elect's son in law.

[CID1990]

It is going to be a sad day for a lot of people when all that comes of all of this is Flynn getting whacked.

Mueller is going to take a beating on the left before this business is over

[Skjellyfetti]

Take the Kushner back channel to Russia story - is there anything particularly illegal about back channel communications with another government? Heck, one could argue the installation of the red phone in the White House and the Kremlin back in the days of the Cold War was a version of this. Granted, it may point to something more nefarious and potentially illegal, but there's no evidence of that at this time.

I covered this above.

No, there is nothing illegal or even improper about having a diplomatic back channel.

A back channel to circumvent US intelligence and government agencies is.

Backchannels aren't necessarily improper. They're usually to circumvent the press. They've probably been used by every modern president to conduct negotiations in the background. Your article says Obama's backchannel "included dozens of meetings and input from the State Department, Defense Department and several other agencies."

Kushner appears to have been trying to use Russian embassy resources to circumvent the US government and intelligence agencies. THAT'S the story.

And, to preempt your inevitable response of "Deep State! Kushner has to avoid Obama moles in IC!!!" So, trusting the Russian IC over the US IC. Ok...

[GannonFan]

Take the Kushner back channel to Russia story - is there anything particularly illegal about back channel communications with another government? Heck, one could argue the installation of the red phone in the White House and the Kremlin back in the days of the Cold War was a version of this. Granted, it may point to something more nefarious and potentially illegal, but there's no evidence of that at this time.

I covered this above.

No, there is nothing illegal or even improper about having a diplomatic back channel.

A back channel to circumvent US intelligence and government agencies is.

Why is it illegal for the President to circumvent US intelligence and government agencies? Don't those agencies all work for him/her in the first place? If the President wants to say something to another head of state, do the US intelligence and government agencies have to give approval or be allowed to listen in? I'm not asking what's prudent or wise, I'm just asking to the legality of it since you say it's illegal for the President to do so.

[Aho Old Guy]

Leaks / Fake News coming hot and heavy




White House response reads like BDK having a hard time choosing to hit the "Fake News" button or the "dangerous leaks" button.



http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/30/polit ... formation/

Impartial question, but why can't it be both, why does it have to be one or the other? Depending on what is leaked, why can't it be misleading (i.e. fake) in terms of what it implies, and why can't it also be illegally leaked? Take the Kushner back channel to Russia story - is there anything particularly illegal about back channel communications with another government? Heck, one could argue the installation of the red phone in the White House and the Kremlin back in the days of the Cold War was a version of this. Granted, it may point to something more nefarious and potentially illegal, but there's no evidence of that at this time. Most stories tie this in with alleged collusion in fixing an election (again, no evidence of such a thing at this point, at least publically) so it's certainly opinionated at this time, and of course since we know about it, it was leaked.

Not that I'm evading your premise, but to quote Hilarious Clinton, "What does it matter?"

President Twit averages 4 to 5 misleading or entirely false statements each day, ostracizes allies while embracing global dirt bags, all while hiding behind proclamations of 'FAKE NEWS!' and 'LEAKERS!'. A more appropriate question is, "Can the current Rightie bunch loot the US Treasury at a greater rate than the Bush Crime Cabal?"

The 45th Presidency is one YUGGGGE false-flag operation.