world

Trump's son-in-law Kushner reported to be under FBI scrutiny in Russia probe

41 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

41 Comments
Login to comment

One of Kushner's attorneys,

As Fitzgerald said, the rich are different. To quote a former JT poster, 'Laws are for peasants'. I'd add and 'those who can't afford a fleet of lawyers - and accountants, and politicians, and local judges'. Trump's in it for his and his family's money. He cares jack nada about the country and the 99%. It's getting increasingly clear that he's struck a Faustian bargain with Professor Woland II.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

No, Kushner is NOT the only current White House official known to be considered a key person in the probe. There's his boss.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Crooks the lot of them!

9 ( +9 / -0 )

I'm also interested in the Devos connection to Russia. Devos' brother is the guy who founded Blackwater.

He met secretly in some remote island with Russians to establish a back channel to Russia.

You have Alpha Bank (a Russian Bank subject to sanctions and tied to Putin) making a unusually high number of internet connections to a server at Trump tower. It made something like 85% of all connections.

You have a Devos company (or foundation?) making the other connections to the server. Why? Is there a connection with the brother and his back channel to Russia?

Let's not forget, you also have Kushner meeting with people from Alpha Bank....

You have political positions that changes favorably and in some cases just plain wrong (e.g., U.S. position on the invasion of Ukraine) after meetings with Russians.

You have Trump asking Russia to hack Clinton email.

You have Trump businesses heavily funded by Russian Oligarchs and mobsters.

For a group of people saying they are going to make America great, they are spending a lot of time and effort on an adversary that wouldn't benefit the U.S. much. An adversary that coincidentally (or as a result) helped them win a presidential election.

There are just too many coincidences for it all to be a coincidence.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

This just keeps getting deeper and deeper..

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Jees, Kushner was supposed to be the "moderate" or "liberal" in trump's team, but now it looks as though even he is dirty and corrupt. His entire team is the swamp

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Meanwhile the press ignores the Obama Administrations use of intelligence services to illegally spy on American citizens. Just another day in the swamp.

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

Meanwhile the press ignores the Obama Administrations use of intelligence services to illegally spy on American citizens. Just another day in the swamp.

The article is about a prominent member of the Trump administration. I'm sure if the allegations about the previous administration have any substance, there will be plenty of opportunities to discuss it. And not just on Fox and other right leaning "news" outlets.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

he is not being investigated or under scrutiny. He is a person of interest, which has no legal meaning whatsoever and does not imply that any crime or violation is even involved.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

He met secretly in some remote island with Russians to establish a back channel to Russia.

I hear this all the time about some back channels being made. I also hear that Russians were overheard by US spies talking about ways they could try to influence people around Trump.

But wait a minute, the media and Dems say Trump and his team were actively doing collusion with the Russians and that Putin was telling him what to do!!?? So why the need for a back channel or a need to figure out how to influence Trumps and his team? Putin could just ask or demand whatever he wanted and Trump and his team HAD to do it, right? The narrative is really starting to fall apart.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

The narrative is really starting to fall apart.

I see no narrative. The administration is in freefall. Chaos aplenty.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

he is not being investigated or under scrutiny.

Kushner "is under scrutiny by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the Russia probe"

The WP states that investigators are focusing on a series of meetings with the R. Amb and a Russian Banker, Alpha Bank. He is being investigated because of the frequency and extent of his meetings with Russians.

Don't worry, there are many many other things to investigate and scrutinize.

I hear this all the time about some back channels being made.

And yet, you still dismiss what people tell you if it doesn't agree with your world view.

Even Spicer was asked about it, and funny enough, he had a response, a non-denial denial. Which is Nixon speak.

Sean Spicer meanwhile issued a classic non-denial denial. “We are not aware of any meetings and Erik Prince had no role in the transition,” said Spicer, the least credible person in Washington, whose statements are regularly proven false.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

So sorry Thomson Reuters and others, many are not buying your "Russia" MSM scam. We all know Victoria Nuland was instrumental in the Ukrainian Coup d'etat, handing out cookies. Why isn't THAT being investigated? Mr. Washington Post, I've honestly never seen this many people so brainwashed before. Reminds me of "Triumph of the Will" by Leni Riefenstahl.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

I've honestly never seen this many people so brainwashed before.

Which makes me wonder why you even read the news.

many are not buying your "Russia" MSM scam. 

Luckily, the FBI isn't "many" people.

The real scam is the disinformation being fed to the American public by the right wing, and Russia. It is a match made in heaven.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Its just ridiculous by now. Actual evidence that the Obama NSA and FBI illegal spied on Americans without warrants and under false pretenses, as well as disseminating this information to unauthorized persons. Often this spying was political in nature. They are even admitting it now. The NSA has suggested these were “inadvertent compliance lapses,” while the FBI mumbled something about human errors in their haste to protect us from terrorism.

But instead lets fill in another name for the but Russia! narrative. Was Flynn, then Manafort, then Roger Stone, then Carter Page, now Kushner. A different name filled in the blank every week as being 'investigated', with the new words 'under scrutiny' now being used to try to imply something criminal happened without having to prove any crime.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

The real scam is the disinformation being fed to the American public by the right wing, and Russia. 

No disagreement there, works both ways. Funny you quickly associate me with the "right wing". Why is that?

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

A usual suspect in for the incorrect info. and obfuscation again!

he is not being investigated or under scrutiny. He is a person of interest, which has no legal meaning whatsoever and does not imply that any crime or violation is even involved.

Every word has a legal meaning. Lawyers get paid to argue about just that issue. Perhaps you meant "Person of interest" is not a legal term of art. Also, it does imply a crime or violation is involved.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/person%20of%20interest

Let me guess . . . Merriam-Webster is part of the MSM, lacks credibility, and published alt-facts. Or, is it that Clinton and/or Obama used a Merriam-Webster once?

Its just ridiculous by now. Actual evidence that the Obama . . .  The NSA has suggested these were “inadvertent compliance lapses,” while the FBI mumbled something about human errors

First, this article is in no way about Obama, which is to say you're obfuscating. Second, the two sentence I quoted contradict each other.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@Black:

Again, complex issues take time to investigate thoroughly. Had Trump taken the time to thoroughly vet his campaign advisors, he may not be in this mess.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Unlike "suspect" and "material witness," "person of interest" has no legal definition, but generally refers to someone law enforcement authorities would like to speak with or investigate further in connection with a crime. It may be used, rather than calling the person a suspect, when they don't want their prime suspect to know they're watching him closely. Critics complain that the term has become a method for law enforcement officers to draw attention to individuals without formally accusing them.

There is concern among critics that innocent people will be tainted by being labelled a person of interest.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/person-of-interest/

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Not surprised.. Many people are under FBI investigation in the US. Including innocent citizens who have tried to help other by spurring an international investigation into situations. You do not have to be guilty of anything to be investigated.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Yes, I saw the first google result also. Then I decided to go to a dictionary for the plain meaning of the phrase, which is what courts do to find the legal definition of a word or phrase that is not specifically defined by a statute or common law. Feel free to spend the money on a lawyer to verify this. You could also go to law school, but that is far more expensive.

 refers to someone law enforcement authorities would like to speak with or investigate further in connection with a crime

I thought this phrase:

does not imply that any crime or violation is even involved.

but even your sources shows how incorrect you were.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

My point is that the media knows what they are doing. Saying Kushner is now being 'investigated' or 'under scrutiny' allows them to continue the Russia narrative a few days until something else comes up they can use. The fact that you can be innocent and still be subject to these gives an easy way out when nothing is found later. it is more than obvious that the media is trying to imply guilt in these headlines.

Also distracts from all the NSA and FBI spying, leaking and misuse of intelligence resources that is going on. Leaks are only to be discussed by the media when they make Trump look bad, he can be blamed or if they can be used as evidence of disorganization in his staff.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

it is more than obvious that the media is trying to imply guilt in these headlines.

Is it? If someone is being investigated or under scrutiny, surely that is open to interpretation. Which is what people are doing.

Leaks are only to be discussed by the media when they make Trump look bad

Without deliberately trying to go off topic; I remind you - Pizzagate. Or are media outlets like Infor Wars, Breitbart et al exempt from querying leaks?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Ummm . . . The media did not label the son-in-law a person of interest, the FBI did. What the media is doing, despite some people's prostestations to the contrary, is its job: reporting facts.

The media does not need leaks to constantly demonstrate Trump looking bad, disarray in his administration, etc. because it has Trump himself. He does a fine job of displaying his inappropriateness and lack of leadership, etc.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

These Russian interference accusations came from Obama and Clinton. Not facts per say...

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Often this spying was political in nature. 

Again, blaming someone else and then insert a conspiracy theory instead of dealing with what is being reported.

Funny you quickly associate me with the "right wing". Why is that?

Your parroting the MSM diatribe of the right wingers and the constant criticism of news or comments critical of Trump.

I had never heard of the acronym MSM until I read your posts and started connecting that diatribe to right wingers and Trump.

I believe the media can be a suped-up ambulance chaser willing to distort the facts or chase blood in order to create sales. At the end of the day, reliability over time is the more telling of who can be trusted. Fox is the closest I get to right wing news, and 9 out of 10 reporters just plain lie. Chris Wallace and maybe Shep Smith are about the only ones who seems to be a reporter. The rest are just a basement dwelling conservative radio show screamers with a tie (or short skirt) and a camera.

My favorite video news source tends to be PBS Newshour because they don't really need advertising and so they are not as sensationalist or aiming at a target audience as other sources. I only recently started watching that again now that I found it on on Youtube.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Melissa:

You may want to do a little research before you comment. It was the intelligence agencies that first accused Russia of interference.

That said, im certain Black and Bass will enjoy you adding to our conversations.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The media did not label the son-in-law a person of interest, the FBI did. What the media is doing, despite some people's prostestations to the contrary, is its job: reporting facts.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-probe-reaches-current-white-house-official-people-familiar-with-the-case-say/2017/05/19/7685adba-3c99-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.6eec72b759cc

The media labelled him a person of interest in order to continue the speculation. Based on anonymous sources, not facts. The FBI has said nothing of the sort.

An FBI spokesman declined to comment.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

These Russian interference accusations came from Obama and Clinton. Not facts per say...

The Russian interference is fact coming from 17 intelligence agencies. The effectiveness, scope, and who was involved is still being investigated.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Hahahaha. You and Bass enjoy using sources in one post that you rail against in other posts as being part of the fake news publishing MSM. Do you want to have your cake, or do you want to eat it?

An FBI spokesman declining to comment does not lead to the logical inference that the media label Jared a person of interest. And, from the first sentence of the article you cited:

"The law enforcement investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign has identified a current White House official as a significant person of interest . . . "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-probe-reaches-current-white-house-official-people-familiar-with-the-case-say/2017/05/19/7685adba-3c99-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.3a9fe1bbf25b

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Swift Justice

I am speaking as someone who knows ... I gathered evidence for over a year for an international case at the Hague. The country accused is a US ally and Obama having the same authority as a supreme court judge basically had my case archived and myself under FBI surveillance..

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

If I use an MSM source you guys wont accept it. If I use a non MSM source you say its fake news. The Washington Post wrote a story hinting that the FBI is investigating Kushner, then today confirmed it. Based on anonymous sources and not any FBI announcement. So the FBI didnt say he is being investigated, the media did. But whatever, the truth will all come out. I give up and I am going to enjoy this supposed Premium Friday here in Japan.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Everyone please read up on how the FISA court response to the illegal activities of the previous administration. This is where actual crimes were committed. Not the 11 month but Russia! thing that has not shown proof of even one criminal act. Have a good weekend!

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447973/nsa-illegal-surveillance-americans-obama-administration-abuse-fisa-court-response

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

The US has the Central intelligence agency not 17.

I hope Trump reviews my ICC case against the Government of Japan and get me off FBI surveillance..

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Melissa:

The CIA is one of the intelligence agencies in the US. Just because the word "intelligence" isn't in the name of an organization doesn't mean it is not engaged in collecting intelligence.

Yikes.

The National Review. Hahahahahahaha! My stomach hurts.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Not the 11 month but Russia! thing that has not shown proof of even one criminal act. 

I suppose hacking servers and emails is not a crime then.

Oh, and as a follow-up, we have obstruction of justice (another criminal act), the proof coming from Trump's own mouth. Other proof coming soon to a special prosecutor near you.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

He will be OK already. Shin Bet will tell the FBI they can't get any intel unless they back off.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Hopefully they will get some good info from Jared. Seems like he would know a lot. :)

3 ( +3 / -0 )

An ex-CIA chief Brennan who discovered there were extensive communications going on between Trump aides and Russian agents that, while he doesn't know if it amounts to collusion, was still worrying enough that not only he recommended the FBI to investigate but also actually had to tell the Russians to cut it out.

His overall point was that the Trump aides were in regular contact with those Russians yet never stopped to ask themselves whom they were actually working with or why Russians would be taking so strong and direct an interest in an American presidential election - that should had raised a red flag that they're Russian agents.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

After this widely despised, unelected, meddling criminal is prosecuted and brought to justice he will be able to cling to only one credit to his name.

That he helped bring forward the downfall and impeachment of the man who installed him in the first place. In the meantime he is being ripped to shreds by the media. There is at least some small justice in that.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Thank You Blacklabel

I just called the Clerk with FISC and told him my story... I also submitted the article of the link you gave to the ICC as evidence in my case.

Oh its Melissaa..

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites