'There Is No Letter' - Kushner Accusation Based on 'Anonymous' Letter Never Proven To Exist

[CowboyTed]

From something I heard on the Sunday shows, it sounds as if some classified types have actually seen the memos in question. They are real enough.

You shouldn't believe everything Trump tells you, either. You will be embarrassed later.

And YOU shouldn't believe everything snowflakes and the Fake News media tells you.

1. The memos are NOT classified and are open for public viewing, if the FBI would release them - this according to the NY Times. (Read the thread I started on 'There is no letter'.)

2. The NY Times was busted reporting about the specific contents of the letter...and had to admit it had NEVER SEEN OR READ the actual memos.

3. An article I cited in the thread I started states the WaPo refuses to release the letter or their sources names.

Know what call a story reported based on no verifiable source names and no evidence (the letter)?
- Liberal Fake News Propaganda Media BULLSHIT.

No disrespect to you, but I will tell you what I tell every snowflake who claims 'Russia-Trump Collusion':

SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE.

Show me the letter. Without names or at least the letter, we are being asked by a media source that has already been busted in the past for reporting fake news to 'TRUST' them now with this.

Ummm...NO!

easy, your one of the leading FAKE NEWS poster on this board...
You have never met a right wing FAKE NEWS story you didn't push on...

 

[easyt65]

Mueller reportedly goes to the FBI and is 'briefed on' the memos. Did he ever SEE them? Without confirmation we only have a promise they exist.
Now you're just being silly. Don't go all Dale Smith on me.
And trust me, I would never blow smoke up your ass. Ick.

You claimed Mueller went to the FBI and was BRIEFED on the memos.
- I asked you for evidence that Mueller actually SAW the memos. You have none.

I pointed out that Chaffetz, the House Oversight Chair, pointed out that NO ONE - not even the reported who wrote the original article - has seen the actual documents / memos. But you are ready to accept that WaPo, who has been proven to have reported Fake News as fact in the past, claiming they have 'anonymous' sources whose identities they refuse to reveal providing a letter whose existence has not been proven.

Good luck with that. Not me.

 

[easyt65]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

No the question is now why a media outlet would not check their story out and learn before reporting the wrong story that it was actually the Russians who proposed the temp back-channel to discuss Syria with the Trump administration to Kushner, as has been proven.

The obvious answer is that the NY Times and WaPo are part of the anti-Trump fake News coalition who do not care about reporting the real truth. 'Selling' Anti-Trump propaganda is what is getting the ratings and selling subscriptions.

 

[OldLady]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Okay, I'm not very good at this, but MY guess is that Kushner didn't initiate that idea. I think it's a cleverly hidden piece of Russian propaganda. Even Kushner isn't naive enough to suggest going to the Russian Embassy to hold secret talks with Moscow. Sounds like the ambassador might have suggested it though. And then talked about it on a bugged line knowing full well it would come out. And whoever leaked that? Is working for the Russians.
That's my guess.

 

[OldLady]

Mueller reportedly goes to the FBI and is 'briefed on' the memos. Did he ever SEE them? Without confirmation we only have a promise they exist.
Now you're just being silly. Don't go all Dale Smith on me.
And trust me, I would never blow smoke up your ass. Ick.

You claimed Mueller went to the FBI and was BRIEFED on the memos.
- I asked you for evidence that Mueller actually SAW the memos. You have none.

I pointed out that Chaffetz, the House Oversight Chair, pointed out that NO ONE - not even the reported who wrote the original article - has seen the actual documents / memos. But you are ready to accept that WaPo, who has been proven to have reported Fake News as fact in the past, claiming they have 'anonymous' sources whose identities they refuse to reveal providing a letter whose existence has not been proven.

Good luck with that. Not me.

Sorry, it's too hard for me to believe that WaPo (wasn't it the NYT that broke that story?) made up the imaginary memos and then somehow planted them in the FBI's files so that even THEY think they exist.

 

[OldLady]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

No the question is now why a media outlet would not check their story out and learn before reporting the wrong story that it was actually the Russians who proposed the temp back-channel to discuss Syria with the Trump administration to Kushner, as has been proven.

The obvious answer is that the NY Times and WaPo are part of the anti-Trump fake News coalition who do not care about reporting the real truth. 'Selling' Anti-Trump propaganda is what is getting the ratings and selling subscriptions.

as has been proven.
I missed that. Who proved Kushner didn't propose it? Personally, I don't think he did, either, but I missed any PROOF of that. Please supply.

 

[danielpalos]

Sources: Mueller visits FBI headquarters, briefed on Comey memos - CNNPolitics.com
Two weeks ago, Mueller was briefed on the memos you and Trump are declaring as imaginary.
The fact that the newspaper doesn't give YOU their sources doesn't mean they are unknown to them. They know who they're talking to. Drive you crazy? You bet. But when the administration won't tell the truth, the people will.

Mueller reportedly goes to the FBI and is 'briefed on' the memos. Did he ever SEE them? Without confirmation we only have a promise they exist.

During the last 10 months of investigations there have been a lot of reports of things existing but never any evidence that they do being released / proven.

"Chaffetz then points out that the investigation has continued despite Comey’s removal, and called into question whether the memo exists at all"

The House Oversight Chairman does not even know if they exist.

"Chaffetz said, “Well nobody’s seen them. Even the reporter that did the story hasn’t seen them. Nobody that I know of, even the reporter, has not actually seen those documents."
- Chaffetz: Do we even know Comey has memos? - Hot Air


So don't try to continue to blow smoke up my ass and call it evidence simply because media who have been proven to have engaged in Fake News in the past claims they have 'anonymous sources' and a letter whose existence has NOT been verified.

Mueller reportedly goes to the FBI and is 'briefed on' the memos. Did he ever SEE them? Without confirmation we only have a promise they exist.
Now you're just being silly. Don't go all Dale Smith on me.
And trust me, I would never blow smoke up your ass. Ick.

Do y'all even bother to inform yourselves, well?

has been briefed on the contents of some of the memos that former FBI Director James Comey kept to document his conversations with President Donald Trump, according to a person familiar with the matter.

 

[danielpalos]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

 

[easyt65]

easy, your one of the leading FAKE NEWS poster on this board...
You have never met a right wing FAKE NEWS story you didn't push on...

CT, thanks for the opinion and insult. Do you have anything else?

I pointed out that to date the NY Times and the WaPo ADMITTEDLY can not / will not provide any evidence that their 'anonymous sources' and / or the 'letter' exists. The NY Times finally came forward and admitted, after their 'factual news reporting', that they never actually saw / read the memos. OL pointed out that Mueller was reportedly BRIEFED on the memos, but it was not confirmed he actually SAW any such documents.

Chaffetx, the House Oversight Committee chairman, again just days ago stated he has never seen them, the reporter did not see them and no one he knows has seen them.

Snowflakes are so eager ... and desperate ... to get anything on Trump that they are willing to take the word of a media source PROVEN to have reported fake news as fact.

I am not completely knocking your decision to believe what has not been proven. That is your choice. I hope it works out for you. In this rabid anti-Trump atmosphere where NOTHING has been proven after 10 months of intense scrutiny, I personally choose not to believe anything without fact, refuse to take anyone's 'promise' that their evidence they refuse to show me exists.

We'll see.

 

[bendog]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elects so sometimes have communications with foreign powers. The left tried to make something of Reagan's with the Iranians, but there just wasn't much there. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Lat

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elect have communications with for powers. That's usual. They seek to establish relationships. The left tired to make something of Reagan and the Iranians in 1980, but there wasn't anything unusual. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Later on, Reagan pretty much ended his presidency by illegally dealing with them, but that was a different animal. There'd be nothing wrong with Trump chatting up Putin, and even suggesting diplomatic ways to ending sanctions. There was nothing wrong with Jared and Ivanka vacationing with Murdoch's ex and Putin's punch. Unseemly perhaps but not necessarily unethical.

What smells here is the need for secrecy. and the ongoing failures to list meetings which were legally required to be disclosed. In the end there may not be a smoking gun. But they were up to something. And it probably involved ending sanctions without Russia getting out of Ukraine. We may not have that proven. But we're going to learn that Trump owes the oligarchs Big League.

 

[danielpalos]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elects so sometimes have communications with foreign powers. The left tried to make something of Reagan's with the Iranians, but there just wasn't much there. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Lat

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elect have communications with for powers. That's usual. They seek to establish relationships. The left tired to make something of Reagan and the Iranians in 1980, but there wasn't anything unusual. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Later on, Reagan pretty much ended his presidency by illegally dealing with them, but that was a different animal. There'd be nothing wrong with Trump chatting up Putin, and even suggesting diplomatic ways to ending sanctions. There was nothing wrong with Jared and Ivanka vacationing with Murdoch's ex and Putin's punch. Unseemly perhaps but not necessarily unethical.

What smells here is the need for secrecy. and the ongoing failures to list meetings which were legally required to be disclosed. In the end there may not be a smoking gun. But they were up to something. And it probably involved ending sanctions without Russia getting out of Ukraine. We may not have that proven. But we're going to learn that Trump owes the oligarchs Big League.

i agree to stand by my original opinion.

 

[bendog]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elects so sometimes have communications with foreign powers. The left tried to make something of Reagan's with the Iranians, but there just wasn't much there. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Lat

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elect have communications with for powers. That's usual. They seek to establish relationships. The left tired to make something of Reagan and the Iranians in 1980, but there wasn't anything unusual. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Later on, Reagan pretty much ended his presidency by illegally dealing with them, but that was a different animal. There'd be nothing wrong with Trump chatting up Putin, and even suggesting diplomatic ways to ending sanctions. There was nothing wrong with Jared and Ivanka vacationing with Murdoch's ex and Putin's punch. Unseemly perhaps but not necessarily unethical.

What smells here is the need for secrecy. and the ongoing failures to list meetings which were legally required to be disclosed. In the end there may not be a smoking gun. But they were up to something. And it probably involved ending sanctions without Russia getting out of Ukraine. We may not have that proven. But we're going to learn that Trump owes the oligarchs Big League.

i agree to stand by my original opinion.

You think other presidents have come into office with comparable secret meetings?

 

[danielpalos]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elects so sometimes have communications with foreign powers. The left tried to make something of Reagan's with the Iranians, but there just wasn't much there. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Lat

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elect have communications with for powers. That's usual. They seek to establish relationships. The left tired to make something of Reagan and the Iranians in 1980, but there wasn't anything unusual. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Later on, Reagan pretty much ended his presidency by illegally dealing with them, but that was a different animal. There'd be nothing wrong with Trump chatting up Putin, and even suggesting diplomatic ways to ending sanctions. There was nothing wrong with Jared and Ivanka vacationing with Murdoch's ex and Putin's punch. Unseemly perhaps but not necessarily unethical.

What smells here is the need for secrecy. and the ongoing failures to list meetings which were legally required to be disclosed. In the end there may not be a smoking gun. But they were up to something. And it probably involved ending sanctions without Russia getting out of Ukraine. We may not have that proven. But we're going to learn that Trump owes the oligarchs Big League.

i agree to stand by my original opinion.

You think other presidents have come into office with comparable secret meetings?

sure.

A previous president was, "teflon coated" not "coated with glue".

 

[bendog]

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elects so sometimes have communications with foreign powers. The left tried to make something of Reagan's with the Iranians, but there just wasn't much there. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Lat

The question is whether Jared is so naïve as to think people wouldn't learn of a secret back channel to allow communication between president_ELECT, Trump and Putin.

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elect have communications with for powers. That's usual. They seek to establish relationships. The left tired to make something of Reagan and the Iranians in 1980, but there wasn't anything unusual. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Later on, Reagan pretty much ended his presidency by illegally dealing with them, but that was a different animal. There'd be nothing wrong with Trump chatting up Putin, and even suggesting diplomatic ways to ending sanctions. There was nothing wrong with Jared and Ivanka vacationing with Murdoch's ex and Putin's punch. Unseemly perhaps but not necessarily unethical.

What smells here is the need for secrecy. and the ongoing failures to list meetings which were legally required to be disclosed. In the end there may not be a smoking gun. But they were up to something. And it probably involved ending sanctions without Russia getting out of Ukraine. We may not have that proven. But we're going to learn that Trump owes the oligarchs Big League.

i agree to stand by my original opinion.

You think other presidents have come into office with comparable secret meetings?

sure.

OK. I don't see support for you view. But it's a free country ... for now anyway.

 

[toomuchtime_]

What Is the Washington Post Hiding About Its Jared Kushner Story?

"To date, there has been no independent verification the letter is real or that WaPo’s description of its contents is accurate. The Washington Post editors also never explain why they withheld the letter."


The Washington Post just set the new world's record for FAKE NEWS, filing a FALSE STORY in which they hurl a FALSE Accusation against the Trump Administration (already debunked with the news that Russia, not Kushner, proposed a temporary back communication channel with the Trump administration specifically to deal with the Syria situation) without having any source ('Anonymous') and no actual 'letter' which they claim is the basis for their story.

Such criminal 'journalism' should not be tolerated. The Trump administration should go after them legally, and at any point it is discovered or they admit that the letter does not exist legal action should be taken against the reporter, those running the WP, and the WP itself. They should be made an example of!


The Democrats and their surrogate Propaganda-Pushing media is the source and to blame for the very same Fake News Hillary claimed harmed her in the election. (Hillary claimed the news about her having broken laws was false...only to have Comey testify before Congress not long ago to confirm that she DID break laws with her un-authorized server / e-mail, though. So in HER case, it really WASN'T 'fake news.)

"Another issue testing the credibility of mainstream news organizations is a May 16 New York Times article claiming a memo former FBI Director James Comey wrote revealed President Donald Trump asked him to drop his investigation of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

But The NYTimes never possessed the Comey memo. According to the newspaper, “The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.”

Freedom of speech is one thing; however, when national media begin intentionally reporting LIES as fact they need to be held legally, judicially accountable!

From something I heard on the Sunday shows, it sounds as if some classified types have actually seen the memos in question. They are real enough.
You shouldn't believe everything Trump tells you, either. You will be embarrassed later.

But you're not embarrassed to swallow whole every bit of anti Trump propaganda you come across?

 

[danielpalos]

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elects so sometimes have communications with foreign powers. The left tried to make something of Reagan's with the Iranians, but there just wasn't much there. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Lat

Mostly politics, as usual. It doesn't help that our Commander in Chief, can be so, "abrasive".

I don't think it's politics as usual. Presidents Elect have communications with for powers. That's usual. They seek to establish relationships. The left tired to make something of Reagan and the Iranians in 1980, but there wasn't anything unusual. The Iranians wanted to get rid of the hostages, but they hated Carter. Later on, Reagan pretty much ended his presidency by illegally dealing with them, but that was a different animal. There'd be nothing wrong with Trump chatting up Putin, and even suggesting diplomatic ways to ending sanctions. There was nothing wrong with Jared and Ivanka vacationing with Murdoch's ex and Putin's punch. Unseemly perhaps but not necessarily unethical.

What smells here is the need for secrecy. and the ongoing failures to list meetings which were legally required to be disclosed. In the end there may not be a smoking gun. But they were up to something. And it probably involved ending sanctions without Russia getting out of Ukraine. We may not have that proven. But we're going to learn that Trump owes the oligarchs Big League.

i agree to stand by my original opinion.

You think other presidents have come into office with comparable secret meetings?

sure.

OK. I don't see support for you view. But it's a free country ... for now anyway.

A previous president was, "teflon coated" not "coated with glue".

 

[postman]

I pointed out that to date the NY Times and the WaPo ADMITTEDLY can not / will not provide any evidence that their 'anonymous sources' and / or the 'letter' exists. The NY Times finally came forward and admitted, after their 'factual news reporting', that they never actually saw / read the memos. OL pointed out that Mueller was reportedly BRIEFED on the memos, but it was not confirmed he actually SAW any such documents.

Maybe you need to change the title: 'There Is No Letter' - Kushner Accusation Based on 'Anonymous' Letter Never Proven To Exist

Your rant has nothing to do with Kushner.

 

[postman]

You think other presidents have come into office with comparable secret meetings?

Only Nixon sending Kissinger to Vietnam to derail the paris peace talks, and Ronald Reagan having the Iranians hold onto the hostages until his inauguration.

 

[easyt65]

Maybe you need to change the title: 'There Is No Letter' - Kushner Accusation Based on 'Anonymous' Letter Never Proven To Exist

Your rant has nothing to do with Kushner.

Umm, the entire accusation - the entire article referenced / linked involves Kushner. 'Knit-picking'? Call it what you want .

 

[danielpalos]

Maybe you need to change the title: 'There Is No Letter' - Kushner Accusation Based on 'Anonymous' Letter Never Proven To Exist

Your rant has nothing to do with Kushner.

Umm, the entire accusation - the entire article referenced / linked involves Kushner. 'Knit-picking'? Call it what you want .

politics as usual.