Breaking news: The Russians asked for a secured line, not Kushner

[radical right]

In the Iraq war, tank crews were constantly being given enemy positions, without being given the source of that information. Everybody receives derrived intel, but are not privy to any PROOF of that information.

LOL, I suspect the guys in those tanks were probably cleared high enough to be told where the enemy was so they could blow their asses up. And I'm pretty sure they had a need to know.

But they weren't cleared to receive sattelite, ELINT or HUMIT intelligence that would reveal sources and methods. They weren't cleared to see the sattelite images the enemy positions were determined by. They would be told where the enemy was, but prohibited from getting PROOF of how that location was determined.

 

[frigidweirdo]

According to a Fox News report from an unnamed source, it was not Kushner who broached the idea of a secured line to Moscow, but the Russians. Which kinda puts a little different spin on this whole imbroglio, which actually isn't a big deal in the 1st place considering how much information is being leaked to the media these days.

Yeah, I get it, unnamed source and a Fox News story. But the WaPo story is based on an anonymous letter; neither story has anything to confirm or deny any part of this incident. It's not like anyone with an ounce of integrity can say which story is right.

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

Fake news, Trump said it was fake news, so it's fake news what you've just said.

My point is that it's ALL fake news, the bullshit story about collusion, the bullshit story about Kushner and this secured line to the Kremlin. There is not one bit of actual proof to back ANY of this shit up. And yet we have liberal left assholes hollering long and loud about impeachment. You guys and your cohorts in the media are a total disgrace; your undying hatred for Trump has pretty much blinded you to honest reason.

It's fake news because you've decided it is so. Not because you know.

We all know Trump comes out with "fake news" every god damn fucking time anything appears that is inconvenient for him.

So an unnamed source say "X" about Kushner and an anonymous letter says "Y" about Kushner but one is fake and the other isn't? That's bullshit dude.

That's not what I said. I haven't made a comment about whether the first is fake or not.

What I made a comment about is that EVERYTHING Trump sees as going against him is "fake news", EVERYTHING. So, then what comes around goes around.

I'm waiting for the truth to come out.

 

[task0778]

In the Iraq war, tank crews were constantly being given enemy positions, without being given the source of that information. Everybody receives derrived intel, but are not privy to any PROOF of that information.

LOL, I suspect the guys in those tanks were probably cleared high enough to be told where the enemy was so they could blow their asses up. And I'm pretty sure they had a need to know.

But they weren't cleared to receive sattelite, ELINT or HUMIT intelligence that would reveal sources and methods. They weren't cleared to see the sattelite images the enemy positions were determined by. They would be told where the enemy was, but prohibited from getting PROOF of how that location was determined.

So what? I got lost, what was your point with the tanks relative to Kushner?

 

[radical right]

There is no crime of talking about a line of communication, especially by a guy who was designated by a president elect to establish such lines of communications with foreign nations.

.

Anybody else with a security clearance, attempting to set up a secret communication channel with the russians would be charged with espionage.

 

[task0778]

According to a Fox News report from an unnamed source, it was not Kushner who broached the idea of a secured line to Moscow, but the Russians. Which kinda puts a little different spin on this whole imbroglio, which actually isn't a big deal in the 1st place considering how much information is being leaked to the media these days.

Yeah, I get it, unnamed source and a Fox News story. But the WaPo story is based on an anonymous letter; neither story has anything to confirm or deny any part of this incident. It's not like anyone with an ounce of integrity can say which story is right.

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

Fake news, Trump said it was fake news, so it's fake news what you've just said.

My point is that it's ALL fake news, the bullshit story about collusion, the bullshit story about Kushner and this secured line to the Kremlin. There is not one bit of actual proof to back ANY of this shit up. And yet we have liberal left assholes hollering long and loud about impeachment. You guys and your cohorts in the media are a total disgrace; your undying hatred for Trump has pretty much blinded you to honest reason.

It's fake news because you've decided it is so. Not because you know.

We all know Trump comes out with "fake news" every god damn fucking time anything appears that is inconvenient for him.

So an unnamed source say "X" about Kushner and an anonymous letter says "Y" about Kushner but one is fake and the other isn't? That's bullshit dude.

That's not what I said. I haven't made a comment about whether the first is fake or not.

What I made a comment about is that EVERYTHING Trump sees as going against him is "fake news", EVERYTHING. So, then what comes around goes around.

I'm waiting for the truth to come out.

Looks to me like everything that the Left sees as going against Trump is NOT fake news, whether it has any facts or evidence to support that conclusion or not. But like you I'm waiting for the truth to come out too.

 

[radical right]

I'm going beyond the concept of a back channel, and looking at it from the standpoint of how would the one that kushner attempted to set up by using the equipment in the russian embassy actually work? Could it even work? Just who would be the one going to the Russian embassy to send a message, and exactly who would they be communicating with?

It's very doubtful that any of us will ever know the answers to your questions. Doesn't seem germane to what we're talking about though.

Actually it answers the question of who would be using it. It's obvious it wouldn't be used personally by Trump, or for that matter it would be difficult for kushner to got o the russian embassy without being followed by the secret service. The only one in the meeting who could slip away to the russian embassy would be Michael Flynn. So what would the National Security advisor want to secretly tell the Russians.

 

[task0778]

There is no crime of talking about a line of communication, especially by a guy who was designated by a president elect to establish such lines of communications with foreign nations.

.

Anybody else with a security clearance, attempting to set up a secret communication channel with the russians would be charged with espionage.

Really? Obama did it, when was he charged? W probably did too, wouldn't be surprised if Hillary and her old man did too.

 

[deanrd]

What are some real facts here?

The back-channel of concern here was initiated by the Russians as a one-time deal after the election to aid Russia/American relations. It was never actually put through and talk of it was initiated AFTER the election! All of this scandal started with the premise that Trump worked with the Russians to thwart Hillary's election campaign!

* Henry Kissinger had back-channels of communication with both the Russians and the Chinese.

* Hillary Clinton had back-channel communications with the Iranians, an avowed terrorist enemy, leading into the Iranian nuclear deal. Where was the media angst over this?

* Obama had back-channels to both the Cubans and Canada, and with Iran as well before being elected.

As with all the other Trump "scandals," this is just another democratic party/media ploy that puts stories on the front page of newspapers and leading in news reports that has the words: 'Russia' and 'Trump' in the headline, thus making it a "breaking news scandal." They want the unaware public to keep seeing this over and over putting subliminal messages in the back of their minds swaying public opinion against Trump; unfortunately, Trump's supporters are among the most proactively informed.

These manufactured false scandals are willful, coordinated, using selective information that supports their case, are based on half-truths, a lack of context and incorrect information, all aimed at concluding that Trump is a traitor, then after that, they try to back-fill the story with circumstantial info in support of their angle.

Republicans so funi. The difference is Jared wanted the line using Russian equipment so our intelligence wouldn't know what was being communicated.

Obama wasn't a traitor. Not like our Russian Poodle. Remember, Obama opened White House logs to the public so we knew who visited the White House and who let them in. All that is secret under Trump. Go ahead, justify it. You can't. You would just be lying.

 

[radical right]

But they weren't cleared to receive sattelite, ELINT or HUMIT intelligence that would reveal sources and methods. They weren't cleared to see the sattelite images the enemy positions were determined by. They would be told where the enemy was, but prohibited from getting PROOF of how that location was determined.

So what? I got lost, what was your point with the tanks relative to Kushner?

Everybody in the military is told information derrived from secret or even top secret sources. They aren't privy to any proof of what they're being told, but they can be sure the people above them saw the secret sources and have proof. So it's standard military practice to be told what they need to know, without being being privy to the proof of the informations source.

 

[OKTexas]

In the Iraq war, tank crews were constantly being given enemy positions, without being given the source of that information. Everybody receives derrived intel, but are not privy to any PROOF of that information.

LOL, I suspect the guys in those tanks were probably cleared high enough to be told where the enemy was so they could blow their asses up. And I'm pretty sure they had a need to know.

But they weren't cleared to receive sattelite, ELINT or HUMIT intelligence that would reveal sources and methods. They weren't cleared to see the sattelite images the enemy positions were determined by. They would be told where the enemy was, but prohibited from getting PROOF of how that location was determined.

Most battlefield data today comes from drones or other surveillance aircraft, it's more real time and actionable.

.

 

[task0778]

I'm going beyond the concept of a back channel, and looking at it from the standpoint of how would the one that kushner attempted to set up by using the equipment in the russian embassy actually work? Could it even work? Just who would be the one going to the Russian embassy to send a message, and exactly who would they be communicating with?

It's very doubtful that any of us will ever know the answers to your questions. Doesn't seem germane to what we're talking about though.

Actually it answers the question of who would be using it. It's obvious it wouldn't be used personally by Trump, or for that matter it would be difficult for kushner to got o the russian embassy without being followed by the secret service. The only one in the meeting who could slip away to the russian embassy would be Michael Flynn. So what would the National Security advisor want to secretly tell the Russians.

Flynn wasn't the NSA pre-inauguration. Seriously, you think Flynn could get into the Russian embassy without our side knowing? And he wouldn't know that? You sure do jump to all kinds of wild suppositions, don't you. And actually it answers NOTHING about who might have used such a system, which BTW never happened.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Fake news, Trump said it was fake news, so it's fake news what you've just said.

My point is that it's ALL fake news, the bullshit story about collusion, the bullshit story about Kushner and this secured line to the Kremlin. There is not one bit of actual proof to back ANY of this shit up. And yet we have liberal left assholes hollering long and loud about impeachment. You guys and your cohorts in the media are a total disgrace; your undying hatred for Trump has pretty much blinded you to honest reason.

It's fake news because you've decided it is so. Not because you know.

We all know Trump comes out with "fake news" every god damn fucking time anything appears that is inconvenient for him.

So an unnamed source say "X" about Kushner and an anonymous letter says "Y" about Kushner but one is fake and the other isn't? That's bullshit dude.

That's not what I said. I haven't made a comment about whether the first is fake or not.

What I made a comment about is that EVERYTHING Trump sees as going against him is "fake news", EVERYTHING. So, then what comes around goes around.

I'm waiting for the truth to come out.

Looks to me like everything that the Left sees as going against Trump is NOT fake news, whether it has any facts or evidence to support that conclusion or not. But like you I'm waiting for the truth to come out too.

Does the left see? Really? I mean, these people are individuals.

But yes, there are people on the left and people on the right who see what is convenient for them as the truth and what isn't convenient as "fake news", Trump being one of those and another thousand or so people on this forum being a few others.

This is one of the biggest problems with democracy, the people who are willing to see everything conveniently then vote for someone who uses the same lame tactics.

 

[radical right]

Anybody else with a security clearance, attempting to set up a secret communication channel with the russians would be charged with espionage.

Really? Obama did it, when was he charged? W probably did too, wouldn't be surprised if Hillary and her old man did too.

FYI, President Obama, like President Trump, doesn't have a security clearance. Now recalculate that meme.

 

[OKTexas]

There is no crime of talking about a line of communication, especially by a guy who was designated by a president elect to establish such lines of communications with foreign nations.

.

Anybody else with a security clearance, attempting to set up a secret communication channel with the russians would be charged with espionage.

Two words, BULL SHIT!

.

 

[12icer]

Fact, obama and clinton colluded with both russia and iran to give them a path to nuclear material and the ability and money to buy modern arms all the while restraining OUR ability to do the same. THAT IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE aiding and comforting the enemies of this country and for most part the world. You can talk all of the shit you want about Trump, he has done NOTHING whatsoever that even comes close to these actions. All of this shit is just to keep the investigation from being about the real lying treasonous scum in the dimshtocrat party. It is really time the Republicans either decide to join the dimshit party, or close the case and try the treasonous shit on the other side and hang them.

 

[radical right]

Flynn wasn't the NSA pre-inauguration. Seriously, you think Flynn could get into the Russian embassy without our side knowing? And he wouldn't know that? You sure do jump to all kinds of wild suppositions, don't you. And actually it answers NOTHING about who might have used such a system, which BTW never happened.

As you said, Flynn wasn't NSA, he was just a Trump associate. He could sneak into the Russian embassy.

 

[task0778]

But they weren't cleared to receive sattelite, ELINT or HUMIT intelligence that would reveal sources and methods. They weren't cleared to see the sattelite images the enemy positions were determined by. They would be told where the enemy was, but prohibited from getting PROOF of how that location was determined.

So what? I got lost, what was your point with the tanks relative to Kushner?

Everybody in the military is told information derrived from secret or even top secret sources. They aren't privy to any proof of what they're being told, but they can be sure the people above them saw the secret sources and have proof. So it's standard military practice to be told what they need to know, without being being privy to the proof of the informations source.

This is pure unadulterated bullshit. NOBODY is told classified information if they don't have the proper clearance AND the need to know. To say that everybody in the military is given classified information is total nonsense; you get the information you need to know but that doesn't mean that information was deemed to be classified. Time for the shoe to be on the other foot: were YOU in the military? Doing what? Ever handled classified data? My guess is NO.

 

[OKTexas]

What are some real facts here?

The back-channel of concern here was initiated by the Russians as a one-time deal after the election to aid Russia/American relations. It was never actually put through and talk of it was initiated AFTER the election! All of this scandal started with the premise that Trump worked with the Russians to thwart Hillary's election campaign!

* Henry Kissinger had back-channels of communication with both the Russians and the Chinese.

* Hillary Clinton had back-channel communications with the Iranians, an avowed terrorist enemy, leading into the Iranian nuclear deal. Where was the media angst over this?

* Obama had back-channels to both the Cubans and Canada, and with Iran as well before being elected.

As with all the other Trump "scandals," this is just another democratic party/media ploy that puts stories on the front page of newspapers and leading in news reports that has the words: 'Russia' and 'Trump' in the headline, thus making it a "breaking news scandal." They want the unaware public to keep seeing this over and over putting subliminal messages in the back of their minds swaying public opinion against Trump; unfortunately, Trump's supporters are among the most proactively informed.

These manufactured false scandals are willful, coordinated, using selective information that supports their case, are based on half-truths, a lack of context and incorrect information, all aimed at concluding that Trump is a traitor, then after that, they try to back-fill the story with circumstantial info in support of their angle.

Republicans so funi. The difference is Jared wanted the line using Russian equipment so our intelligence wouldn't know what was being communicated.

Obama wasn't a traitor. Not like our Russian Poodle. Remember, Obama opened White House logs to the public so we knew who visited the White House and who let them in. All that is secret under Trump. Go ahead, justify it. You can't. You would just be lying.

Considering all the leaks coming from our intel folks, I would say they were totally justified in wanting a line intel couldn't see. But you're just a hack and evidence doesn't matter to you.

.

 

[task0778]

Flynn wasn't the NSA pre-inauguration. Seriously, you think Flynn could get into the Russian embassy without our side knowing? And he wouldn't know that? You sure do jump to all kinds of wild suppositions, don't you. And actually it answers NOTHING about who might have used such a system, which BTW never happened.

As you said, Flynn wasn't NSA, he was just a Trump associate. He could sneak into the Russian embassy.

You really think we don't have surveillance on who goes in and out?

Okay, this is getting too weird, I'm pretty much done here. All you've done in this entire thread is speculate on one wild idea after another with nothing but your own conjecture.

 

[oreo]

According to a Fox News report from an unnamed source, it was not Kushner who broached the idea of a secured line to Moscow, but the Russians. Which kinda puts a little different spin on this whole imbroglio, which actually isn't a big deal in the 1st place considering how much information is being leaked to the media these days.

Yeah, I get it, unnamed source and a Fox News story. But the WaPo story is based on an anonymous letter; neither story has anything to confirm or deny any part of this incident. It's not like anyone with an ounce of integrity can say which story is right.

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

The other side has a lot more than some BULLSHIT anonymous letter--that Sean Hannity probably wrote.

The claim comes from intercepts of conversations between Russia's ambassador and Moscow. Kislyak reportedly told higher-ups in Moscow that Kushner suggested the proposal in a meeting at Trump Tower -- which former national security adviser Michael Flynn also attended -- in December. Kushner "suggested using Russian diplomatic facilities in the United States for the communications,"

Washington Post: Kushner proposed secret communication channel with Kremlin - CNNPolitics.com

I'll tell you FOX News has really turned into a bullshit media network. The Seth Rich conspiracy that they were forced to retract or get the pants sued off of them, and now this. A Tabloid magazine would be more credible that FOX News today.
Fox News retracts controversial story on Seth Rich’s death, alleged WikiLeaks contact – The Denver Post

FOX News is doing it for a reason. They OWN Donald Trump, and they know it. It was they that gave Trump an unprecedented 2 billion in free news coverage during the primaries while ignoring all other GOP candidates. And they're paying a very heavy price for it now.
But WHY is CNN crushing Fox News in the ratings?