"一切都是刚刚开始": Papadopoulos被判刑, Manafort 被裁定8项罪名成立、Gates, Flynn, Cohen, Patten认罪

本帖由 ccc2017-07-24 发布。版面名称:渥太华华人论坛

  1. ccc

    ccc 难得糊涂 ID:6614 管理成员 VIP

    注册:
    2003-04-13
    帖子:
    200,761
    支持:
    29,845
    声望:
    1,393
    金钱:
    $60,786
  2. upload_2017-7-24_12-29-24.png

    Presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner is set to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee this morning, and what is striking about his extensive opening statement is the degree to which it seeks to insulate Kushner himself from any culpability or responsibility for the problematic known facts about the Russia affair — particularly the known facts that concern Donald Trump Jr.

    Kushner’s statement takes exceptional care to separate him, with scalpel-like precision, from the now-notorious meeting that Trump Jr. arranged with a Russian lawyer — a meeting that Trump Jr. had been informed would furnish the Trump campaign with information about Hillary Clinton supplied by the Russian government. Here is what Kushner’s statement says about the meeting (emphasis added):

    In June 2016, my brother-in-law, Donald Trump Jr. asked if I was free to stop by a meeting on June 9 at 3:00 p.m. The campaign was headquartered in the same building as his office in Trump Tower, and it was common for each of us to swing by the other’s meetings when requested. He eventually sent me his own email changing the time of the meeting to 4:00 p.m. That email was on top of a long back and forth that I did not read at the time. As I did with most emails when I was working remotely, I quickly reviewed on my iPhone the relevant message that the meeting would occur at 4:00 PM at his office. Documents confirm my memory that this was calendared as “Meeting: Don Jr.| Jared Kushner.” No one else was mentioned.

    I arrived at the meeting a little late. When I got there, the person who has since been identified as a Russian attorney was talking about the issue of a ban on U.S. adoptions of Russian children. I had no idea why that topic was being raised and quickly determined that my time was not well-spent at this meeting. Reviewing emails recently confirmed my memory that the meeting was a waste of our time and that, in looking for a polite way to leave and get back to my work, I actually emailed an assistant from the meeting after I had been there for ten or so minutes and wrote “Can u pls call me on my cell? Need excuse to get out of meeting.”

    I had not met the attorney before the meeting nor spoken with her since. I thought nothing more of this short meeting until it came to my attention recently. I did not read or recall this email exchange before it was shown to me by my lawyers when reviewing documents for submission to the committees. No part of the meeting I attended included anything about the campaign, there was no follow up to the meeting that I am aware of, I do not recall how many people were there (or their names), and I have no knowledge of any documents being offered or accepted. Finally, after seeing the email, I disclosed this meeting prior to it being reported in the press on a supplement to my security clearance form, even if that was not required as meeting the definitions of the form.
    It’s not entirely clear that the “long back and forth” that Kushner claims he “did not read at the time” is the email chain that Trump Jr. released, under duress, which demonstrated that the meeting was taken with the express purpose of getting information advertised as coming from the Russian government. But it seems clear that this is what he is referring to. Note that Kushner does not say one way or the other whether he had been sent this email chain before. What we do know, however, is that Kushner says he never read it. And if Kushner is to be believed, he agreed to, and showed up at, this meeting without having any idea why it was being held.

    This, even though Trump Jr. was quite excited about what this meeting might yield (“I love it,” Trump Jr. exulted in the email chain), and even though Trump’s then-campaign chair Paul Manafort was also present. This was a meeting attended by Trump’s top brain trust, on the expectation that it would yield greatly damaging information about Trump’s opponent, just as the campaign was shifting into general election mode — but Kushner was unaware of its purpose.

    Also note the exceptional care that went into Kushner’s characterization of the meeting. He claims he arrived just late enough to miss the incriminating part of the meeting. Trump Jr. admitted in his second statement that the Russian lawyer brought up the campaign (after an initial statement claiming the meeting was just about Russian adoptions):

    After pleasantries were exchanged, the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Ms. Clinton.
    Kushner’s statement does not deny outright either that the meeting did address the campaign or that any documents had been offered to the Trump camp, which the email chain appears to confirm. All it does is insulate Kushner from those facts.

    It is certainly possible that Kushner’s account is accurate. But these things are now investigable: Efforts can be made to determine whether Kushner had been told of, or discussed, the purpose of the meeting beforehand, and to determine whether he arrived just late enough to miss the part of the meeting that concerned the campaign.

    But whatever the truth turns out to be on those fronts, what Kushner’s statement does not do is contest any of the known facts about that meeting — known facts that are deeply problematic for Trump Jr. and even for Trump himself. The meeting, at a minimum, shows that Trump Jr. was eager to collude with the Russian government, which, he had been told, was trying to get his father elected president. Kushner’s statement denies any collusion on his own part, and claims no awareness of any other collusion:

    I did not collude, nor know of anyone else in the campaign who colluded, with any foreign government.
    Of course, what Trump Jr.’s email chain showed is that the campaign jumped at the chance to collude, even if it ended up not happening at that meeting. Recall that Trump Jr.’s original statement covered up the real reason for the meeting, and that President Trump himself reportedly signed off on that initial false statement, which means the president actively participated in an effort to mislead the country about his own campaign’s eagerness to collude with Russia to help him win. Kushner’s statement offers nothing to challenge these underlying facts. It just separates him from them.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...r-under-the-bus-bigly/?utm_term=.3f0964fdff1c
     
  3. Clemens

    Clemens 轻度桶积饭 ID:101300 VIP

    注册:
    2011-07-14
    帖子:
    464
    支持:
    143
    声望:
    53
    金钱:
    $308
  4. 西城大妈

    西城大妈 知名不具 ID:152564

    注册:
    2015-08-20
    帖子:
    7,712
    支持:
    2,989
    声望:
    223
    金钱:
    $88,119
    床铺说了, 他有特赦权, 必要时可以特赦他自己。:tx:
     
    已获得ccc的支持。
  5. Teddy

    Teddy 本站元老 ID:680 VIP

    注册:
    2002-03-11
    帖子:
    8,015
    支持:
    1,651
    声望:
    373
    金钱:
    $99,836
    使用次数有限制吗?
     
  6. 向问天

    向问天 日月神教光明左使 ID:112302 VIP

    注册:
    2012-09-04
    帖子:
    41,198
    支持:
    7,900
    声望:
    273
    金钱:
    $38,271

    以前只知道他的小儿子,现在大儿子也出名了。
     
  7. ccc

    ccc 难得糊涂 ID:6614 管理成员 VIP

    注册:
    2003-04-13
    帖子:
    200,761
    支持:
    29,845
    声望:
    1,393
    金钱:
    $60,786
    尼克松后悔得从墓地走出来了。:D
     
    已获得西城大妈的支持。
  8. 且珍惜

    且珍惜 新手上路 ID:133027

    注册:
    2014-04-02
    帖子:
    57
    支持:
    28
    声望:
    28
    金钱:
    $2,984
    民主与专制, 没有哪个更好一说, 完全看受众。 有时民主看专制的笑话, 有时专制看民主的笑话, 东风压倒西风还是西风压倒东风, 就看谁能吹了。
     
    已获得老领导的支持。
  9. 明的凡

    明的凡 知名会员 ID:106409

    注册:
    2012-02-28
    帖子:
    10,712
    支持:
    960
    声望:
    173
    金钱:
    $117,264

    It's truly only at the very beginning of Trump's eight-short-year presidency but actually the second episode of liberals' Saga of Nothing Burger. I wonder what will be in Episode 3, which the fake news would have to cook up soon to avoid sliding into irrelevance. :)

     
  10. ccc

    ccc 难得糊涂 ID:6614 管理成员 VIP

    注册:
    2003-04-13
    帖子:
    200,761
    支持:
    29,845
    声望:
    1,393
    金钱:
    $60,786
    都快成光杆司令了。
     
  11. 明的凡

    明的凡 知名会员 ID:106409

    注册:
    2012-02-28
    帖子:
    10,712
    支持:
    960
    声望:
    173
    金钱:
    $117,264
    那是你和其它老左们的美好梦想,正像你们一直沉醉其中不愿醒来弹劾梦一样。:)
     
  12. googlebot

    googlebot 新手上路 ID:154145

    注册:
    2015-11-04
    帖子:
    189
    支持:
    39
    声望:
    38
    金钱:
    $2,421
    闯王直接搞死neflix的纸牌屋, 这情节超越编辑的想象力,
     
  13. ccc

    ccc 难得糊涂 ID:6614 管理成员 VIP

    注册:
    2003-04-13
    帖子:
    200,761
    支持:
    29,845
    声望:
    1,393
    金钱:
    $60,786
    upload_2017-7-24_19-33-25.png

    Washington (CNN)For nearly a year, President Donald Trump and several of his top advisers have repeatedly denied that there was any contact between members of the Trump campaign and individuals tied to the Russian government. But the veracity of that story appears to be crumbling under contradictory revelations from the President's son, son-in-law and the current attorney general.

    Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders, former White House press secretary Sean Spicer, Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort have all previously denied that there were any contacts or ties between the Trump campaign and Russian government officials or Russians trying to meddle in the election.

    Trump has routinely called the Russia story "fake news" and a "witch hunt."

    Asked in February if anyone on his campaign had contacts with Russia during the election, Trump first said, "General Flynn was obviously dealing. So that's one person." Asked if that contact happened during the election, Trump responded, "no, nobody that I know of." He went on to say, "I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge no person that I deal with does."
    Jared Kushner, Donald Trump Jr. and Attorney General Jeff Sessions have all confirmed (on-record) that they had Russia meetings during the campaign, despite all these denials.

    The President and his top aides stopped denying that members of the Trump campaign had contact with Russians after Jeff Sessions confirmed in March that he met with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak in July and September 2016.
    Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner further contradicted previous denials from the President and his top advisers in a statement Monday to the Senate and House intelligence committees ahead of his closed-door interview with lawmakers.

    Kushner confirmed that he had "perhaps" four encounters with Russians during the 2016 campaign and transition in the 11-page statement but insisted that he discussed nothing improper during those meetings, which include two encounters with the Russian ambassador, a meeting with the head of a Russian state-owned bank and the June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer and others that was set up by Kushner's brother-in-law, Donald Trump Jr.
    "I did not collude, nor know of anyone else in the campaign who colluded, with any foreign government," Kushner said in the statement. "I had no improper contacts. I have not relied on Russian funds to finance my business activities in the private sector. I have tried to be fully transparent with regard to the filing of my SF-86 form, above and beyond what is required. Hopefully, this puts these matters to rest."
    Kushner reiterated his denial, stating he "did not collude with Russia" in front of cameras outside the West Wing on Monday.

    Donald Trump Jr., Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and Trump campaign adviser Carter Page have all also acknowledged their own interactions with Russians during the campaign, though they all deny anything nefarious took place.
    But even if the encounters were benign in nature, revelations from members of Trump's inner circle that there was contact during the campaign clash with the blanket denials previously offered by former campaign advisers, current senior White House officials and even the President himself.

    Here is a look at some of those previous denials:

    July 26, 2016: Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort tells ABC News that there are no ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.
    ABC News: Are there any ties between Mr. Trump, you or your campaign and Putin and his regime?
    Manafort: No, there are not. That's absurd. And, you know, there's no basis to it.

    November 10, 2016: A Russian diplomat says that some Russians were in touch with Trump's associates during the campaign. In response, Hope Hicks, then a spokeswoman for the Trump transition, issued a blanket denial: "We are not aware of any campaign representatives that were in touch with any foreign entities before yesterday, when Mr. Trump spoke with many world leaders," she told the New York Times. She also told the AP: "It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign."

    December 18, 2016: Kellyanne Conway denies any contact between the Trump campaign and Russia in an interview with CBS News' John Dickerson.
    Dickerson: All right. We are not going to get any insight into the president-elect's thinking here, but let me try this. Did anyone involved in the Trump campaign have any contact with Russians trying to meddle with the election?
    Conway: Absolutely not. And I discussed that with the president-elect just last night. Those conversations never happened. I hear people saying it like it's a fact on television. That is just not only inaccurate and false, but it's dangerous.

    January 11, 2017: Trump denies "he or anyone on his campaign" had any contact with Russia during the campaign while speaking to reporters. The question was a shouted question as Trump walked away from a press conference
    Reporter: Did you or anyone in your campaign...
    Trump: No.
    Reporter: ...have any contact with Russia leading up to or during the campaign?
    Trump: No, not at all.

    January 15, 2017: Vice President Mike Pence denies there were contacts between Trump campaign and Russia in an interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News.
    Wallace: If there were any contacts, sir, I'm just trying to get an answer.
    Pence: Yes. I -- of course not. Why would there be any contacts between the campaign? Chris, the -- this is all a distraction, and it's all part of a narrative to de-legitimize the election and to question the legitimacy of this presidency, the American people see right through it.

    February 14, 2017: Press Secretary Sean Spicer denies knowledge of any contact between the Trump campaign and Russia when questioned by ABC's Jonathan Karl during a White House briefing.
    Karl: Back in January, the President said that nobody in his campaign had been in touch with the Russians. Now, today, can you still say definitively that nobody on the Trump campaign, not even General Flynn, had any contact with the Russians before the election?
    Spicer: My understanding is that what General Flynn has now expressed is that during the transition period -- well, we were very clear that during the transition period, he did speak with the ambassador --
    Karl: I'm talking about during the campaign.
    Spicer: I don't have any -- there's nothing that would conclude me -- that anything different has changed with respect to that time period.

    February 16, 2017: Trump says he's unaware of any contact between his aides and Russia during a White House press conference.
    Question: I just was hoping that we could get a 'yes or no' answer on one of these questions involving Russia. Can you say whether you are aware that anyone who advised your campaign had contacts with Russia during the course of the election?
    Trump: Well I told you, Gen. Flynn obviously was dealing. So that's one person. But he was dealing, as he should have been.
    Question: During the election?
    Trump: No. Nobody that I know of. Nobody...
    Question: So you're not aware of any contact during the course....
    Trump: Look, look, look...
    Question: ... of the election?
    Trump: How many times do I have to answer this question?
    Question: Can you just say yes or no?
    Trump: Russia is a ruse. I know you have to get up and ask a question. It's so important. Russia is a ruse. I have nothing to do with Russia. Haven't made a phone call to Russia in years. Don't speak to people from Russia. Not that I wouldn't. I just have nobody to speak to. I spoke to Putin twice. He called me on the election. I told you this. And he called me on the inauguration and a few days ago. We had a very good talk, especially the second one, lasted for a pretty long period of time. I'm sure you probably get it because it was classified. So I'm sure everybody in this room perhaps has it. But we had a very, very good talk. I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge no person that I deal with does.

    February 20, 2017: White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders denies any contacts occurred during the campaign.
    Huckabee Sanders: "This is a non-story because to the best of our knowledge, no contacts took place, so it's hard to make a comment on something that never happened."
     
  14. ccc

    ccc 难得糊涂 ID:6614 管理成员 VIP

    注册:
    2003-04-13
    帖子:
    200,761
    支持:
    29,845
    声望:
    1,393
    金钱:
    $60,786

    [​IMG]

    Jared Kushner reads a statment in front of West Wing of the White House on July 24, 2017 in Washington, DC.



    Read Jared Kushner’s full statement on the Trump-Russia affair to Congress

    Before his closed-door testimony at a Senate committee, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law gave his own version of that infamous Trump Tower meeting on June 9, 2016, his meeting with Russian envoy Sergey Kislyak and more

    [​IMG]
    JIM BOURG/REUTERS


    The Globe and Mail Last updated: Monday, Jul. 24, 2017 6:02PM EDT

    reporting by The New York Times uncovered details about a meeting on June 9, 2016, where Donald Trump Jr. – the future president’s eldest son – understood he’d be getting incriminating information about Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate, from a Russian lawyer. Mr. Kushner and then campaign chairman Paul Manfort were present at this meeting. The revelations, confirmed when Mr. Trump Jr. released the chain of e-mails setting up the meeting, led to renewed appeals to get the men to speak before the congressional committees investigating the Trump-Russia matter.

    Which committee is this again? Mr. Kushner met the Senate intelligence committee in a private meeting on Monday, and will do the same with the House intelligence committee on Tuesday. Mr. Manafort and Donald Trump Jr. are due to speak to the Senate intelligence committee in a closed session followed by a public hearing, though no dates have been announced.

    What did Kushner say about his meeting with Congress? In his statement, Mr. Kushner said he’s coming forward “in order to shed light on issues that have been raised about my role in the Trump for President Campaign and during the transition period,” adding that “there has been a great deal of conjecture, speculation, and inaccurate information about me.” About an hour after his private meeting on Capitol Hill, he gave a very brief statement at the White House reiterating that “I did not collude with Russia, nor do I know of anyone else in the campaign who did so.” He also said his father-in-law won the election because he had the better message for Americans, and “suggesting otherwise ridicules those who voted for him.”

    On his “back channel” proposal to the Russian ambassador:

    • Mr. Kushner says his assistant arranged a meeting at Trump Tower with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, on Nov. 16, less than two weeks after Election Day. “Previous to receiving this request, I could not even recall the Russian Ambassador’s name,” though he acknowledges they met at an event seven months earlier.
    • Mr. Kushner says they talked about military policy in Syria, and said he asked about existing communications channels between the Russian and U.S. militaries. He denies asking for a “secret back channel” to communicate with Moscow directly.
    On his security clearance:
    • One section of his statement deals with the SF-86 form he submitted to get his security clearance as a White House adviser, which didn’t mention the Russian contacts that have recently come to light.
    • Blaming his assistant, he says the form was “prematurely submitted due to a miscommunication” before he recalled the June 9 meeting and other Russian contacts. He says this initial form omitted not just his Russian contacts, but all of his foreign contacts, including those with Jordanian and Mexican officials.
    • He describes sending follow-up information describing his foreign contacts in more detail. “Over the last six months, I have made every effort to provide the FBI with whatever information is needed to investigate my background.”
    On the collusion question:
    • “I did not collude, nor know of anyone else in the campaign who colluded, with any foreign government.”

    Kushner’s full statement
    [​IMG]
    YURI GRIPAS/REUTERS

    Note: Text in bold was highlighted as such in the original statement.

    STATEMENT OF JARED C. KUSHNER TO CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES

    July 24, 2017

    I am voluntarily providing this statement, submitting documents, and sitting for interviews in order to shed light on issues that have been raised about my role in the Trump for President Campaign and during the transition period.

    I am not a person who has sought the spotlight. First in my business and now in public service, I have worked on achieving goals, and have left it to others to work on media and public perception. Because there has been a great deal of conjecture, speculation, and inaccurate information about me, I am grateful for the opportunity to set the record straight.

    My Role in the Trump for President Campaign

    Before joining the administration, I worked in the private sector, building and managing companies. My experience was in business, not politics, and it was not my initial intent to play a large role in my father-in-law’s campaign when he decided to run for President. However, as the campaign progressed, I was called on to assist with various tasks and aspects of the campaign, and took on more and more responsibility.

    Over the course of the primaries and general election campaign, my role continued to evolve. I ultimately worked with the finance, scheduling, communications, speechwriting, polling, data and digital teams, as well as becoming a point of contact for foreign government officials.

    All of these were tasks that I had never performed on a campaign previously. When I was faced with a new challenge, I would reach out to contacts, ask advice, find the right person to manage the specific challenge, and work with that person to develop and execute a plan of action. I was lucky to work with some incredibly talented people along the way, all of whom made significant contributions toward the campaign’s ultimate success. Our nimble culture allowed us to adjust to the ever-changing circumstances and make changes on the fly as the situation warranted. I share this information because these actions should be viewed through the lens of a fast-paced campaign with thousands of meetings and interactions, some of which were impactful and memorable and many of which were not.

    It is also important to note that a campaign’s success starts with its message and its messenger. Donald Trump had the right vision for America and delivered his message perfectly. The results speak for themselves. Not only did President Trump defeat sixteen skilled and experienced primary opponents and win the presidency; he did so spending a fraction of what his opponent spent in the general election. He outworked his opponent and ran one of the best campaigns in history using both modern technology and traditional methods to bring his message to the American people.

    Campaign Contacts with Foreign Persons

    When it became apparent that my father-in-law was going to be the Republican nominee for President, as normally happens, a number of officials from foreign countries attempted to reach out to the campaign. My father-in-law asked me to be a point of contact with these foreign countries. These were not contacts that I initiated, but, over the course of the campaign, I had incoming contacts with people from approximately 15 countries. To put these requests in context, I must have received thousands of calls, letters and emails from people looking to talk or meet on a variety of issues and topics, including hundreds from outside the United States. While I could not be responsive to everyone, I tried to be respectful of any foreign government contacts with whom it would be important to maintain an ongoing, productive working relationship were the candidate to prevail. To that end, I called on a variety of people with deep experience, such as Dr. Henry Kissinger, for advice on policy for the candidate, which countries/representatives with which the campaign should engage, and what messaging would resonate. In addition, it was typical for me to receive 200 or more emails a day during the campaign. I did not have the time to read every one, especially long emails from unknown senders or email chains to which I was added at some later point in the exchange.

    With respect to my contacts with Russia or Russian representatives during the campaign, there were hardly any. The first that I can recall was at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. in April 2016. This was when then candidate Trump was delivering a major foreign policy speech. Doing the event and speech had been my idea, and I oversaw its execution. I arrived at the hotel early to make sure all logistics were in order. After that, I stopped into the reception to thank the host of the event, Dimitri Simes, the publisher of the bi-monthly foreign policy magazine, The National Interest, who had done a great job putting everything together. Mr. Simes and his group had created the guest list and extended the invitations for the event. He introduced me to several guests, among them four ambassadors, including Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. With all the ambassadors, including Mr. Kislyak, we shook hands, exchanged brief pleasantries and I thanked them for attending the event and said I hoped they would like candidate Trump’s speech and his ideas for a fresh approach to America’s foreign policy. The ambassadors also expressed interest in creating a positive relationship should we win the election. Each exchange lasted less than a minute; some gave me their business cards and invited me to lunch at their embassies. I never took them up on any of these invitations and that was the extent of the interactions.

    Reuters news service has reported that I had two calls with Ambassador Kislyak at some time between April and November of 2016. While I participated in thousands of calls during this period, I do not recall any such calls with the Russian Ambassador. We have reviewed the phone records available to us and have not been able to identify any calls to any number we know to be associated with Ambassador Kislyak and I am highly skeptical these calls took place. A comprehensive review of my land line and cell phone records from the time does not reveal those calls. I had no ongoing relationship with the Ambassador before the election, and had limited knowledge about him then. In fact, on November 9, the day after the election, I could not even remember the name of the Russian Ambassador. When the campaign received an email purporting to be an official note of congratulations from President Putin, I was asked how we could verify it was real. To do so I thought the best way would be to ask the only contact I recalled meeting from the Russian government, which was the Ambassador I had met months earlier, so I sent an email asking Mr. Simes, “What is the name of the Russian ambassador?” Through my lawyer, I have asked Reuters to provide the dates on which the calls supposedly occurred or the phone number at which I supposedly reached, or was reached by, Ambassador Kislyak. The journalist refused to provide any corroborating evidence that they occurred.

    The only other Russian contact during the campaign is one I did not recall at all until I was reviewing documents and emails in response to congressional requests for information. In June 2016, my brother-in-law, Donald Trump Jr. asked if I was free to stop by a meeting on June 9 at 3:00 p.m. The campaign was headquartered in the same building as his office in Trump Tower, and it was common for each of us to swing by the other’s meetings when requested. He eventually sent me his own email changing the time of the meeting to 4:00 p.m. That email was on top of a long back and forth that I did not read at the time. As I did with most emails when I was working remotely, I quickly reviewed on my iPhone the relevant message that the meeting would occur at 4:00 PM at his office. Documents confirm my memory that this was calendared as “Meeting: Don Jr.| Jared Kushner.” No one else was mentioned.

    I arrived at the meeting a little late. When I got there, the person who has since been identified as a Russian attorney was talking about the issue of a ban on U.S. adoptions of Russian children. I had no idea why that topic was being raised and quickly determined that my time was not well-spent at this meeting. Reviewing emails recently confirmed my memory that the meeting was a waste of our time and that, in looking for a polite way to leave and get back to my work, I actually emailed an assistant from the meeting after I had been there for ten or so minutes and wrote “Can u pls call me on my cell? Need excuse to get out of meeting.” I had not met the attorney before the meeting nor spoken with her since. I thought nothing more of this short meeting until it came to my attention recently. I did not read or recall this email exchange before it was shown to me by my lawyers when reviewing documents for submission to the committees. No part of the meeting I attended included anything about the campaign, there was no follow up to the meeting that I am aware of, I do not recall how many people were there (or their names), and I have no knowledge of any documents being offered or accepted. Finally, after seeing the email, I disclosed this meeting prior to it being reported in the press on a supplement to my security clearance form, even if that was not required as meeting the definitions of the form.

    There was one more possible contact that I will note. On October 30, 2016, I received a random email from the screenname “Guccifer400.” This email, which I interpreted as a hoax, was an extortion attempt and threatened to reveal candidate Trump’s tax returns and demanded that we send him 52 bitcoins in exchange for not publishing that information. I brought the email to the attention of a U.S. Secret Service agent on the plane we were all travelling on and asked what he thought. He advised me to ignore it and not to reply – which is what I did. The sender never contacted me again.

    To the best of my recollection, these were the full extent of contacts I had during the campaign with persons who were or appeared to potentially be representatives of the Russian government.

    Transition Contacts with Foreign Persons

    The transition period after the election was even more active than the campaign. Starting on election night, we began to receive an incredible volume of messages and invitations from well-wishers in the United States and abroad. Dozens of messages came from foreign officials seeking to set up foreign leader calls and create lines of communication and relationships with what would be the new administration. During this period, I recall having over fifty contacts with people from over fifteen countries. Two of those meetings were with Russians, neither of which I solicited.

    On November 16, 2016, my assistant received a request for a meeting from the Russian Ambassador. As I mentioned before, previous to receiving this request, I could not even recall the Russian Ambassador’s name, and had to ask for the name of the individual I had seen at the Mayflower Hotel almost seven months earlier. In addition, far from being urgent, that meeting was not set up for two weeks – on December 1. The meeting occurred in Trump Tower, where we had our transition office, and lasted twenty– thirty minutes. Lt. General Michael Flynn (Ret.), who became the President’s National Security Advisor, also attended. During the meeting, after pleasantries were exchanged, as I had done in many of the meetings I had and would have with foreign officials, I stated our desire for a fresh start in relations. Also, as I had done in other meetings with foreign officials, I asked Ambassador Kislyak if he would identify the best person (whether the Ambassador or someone else) with whom to have direct discussions and who had contact with his President. The fact that I was asking about ways to start a dialogue after Election Day should of course be viewed as strong evidence that I was not aware of one that existed before Election Day.

    The Ambassador expressed similar sentiments about relations, and then said he especially wanted to address U.S. policy in Syria, and that he wanted to convey information from what he called his “generals.” He said he wanted to provide information that would help inform the new administration. He said the generals could not easily come to the U.S. to convey this information and he asked if there was a secure line in the transition office to conduct a conversation. General Flynn or I explained that there were no such lines. I believed developing a thoughtful approach on Syria was a very high priority given the ongoing humanitarian crisis, and I asked if they had an existing communications channel at his embassy we could use where they would be comfortable transmitting the information they wanted to relay to General Flynn. The Ambassador said that would not be possible and so we all agreed that we would receive this information after the Inauguration. Nothing else occurred. I did not suggest a “secret back channel.” I did not suggest an on-going secret form of communication for then or for when the administration took office. I did not raise the possibility of using the embassy or any other Russian facility for any purpose other than this one possible conversation in the transition period. We did not discuss sanctions.

    Approximately a week later, on December 6, the Embassy asked if I could meet with the Ambassador on December 7. I declined. They then asked if I could meet on December 6; I declined again. They then asked when the earliest was that I could meet. I declined these requests because I was working on many other responsibilities for the transition. He asked if he could meet my assistant instead and, to avoid offending the Ambassador, I agreed. He did so on December 12. My assistant reported that the Ambassador had requested that I meet with a person named Sergey Gorkov who he said was a banker and someone with a direct line to the Russian President who could give insight into how Putin was viewing the new administration and best ways to work together. I agreed to meet Mr. Gorkov because the Ambassador has been so insistent, said he had a direct relationship with the President, and because Mr. Gorkov was only in New York for a couple days. I made room on my schedule for the meeting that occurred the next day, on December 13.

    The meeting with Mr. Gorkov lasted twenty to twenty-five minutes. He introduced himself and gave me two gifts – one was a piece of art from Nvgorod, the village where my grandparents were from in Belarus, and the other was a bag of dirt from that same village. (Any notion that I tried to conceal this meeting or that I took it thinking it was in my capacity as a businessman is false. In fact, I gave my assistant these gifts to formally register them with the transition office). After that, he told me a little about his bank and made some statements about the Russian economy. He said that he was friendly with President Putin, expressed disappointment with U.S.-Russia relations under President Obama and hopes for a better relationship in the future. As I did at the meeting with Ambassador Kislyak, I expressed the same sentiments I had with other foreign officials I met. There were no specific policies discussed. We had no discussion about the sanctions imposed by the Obama Administration. At no time was there any discussion about my companies, business transactions, real estate projects, loans, banking arrangements or any private business of any kind. At the end of the short meeting, we thanked each other and I went on to other meetings. I did not know or have any contact with Mr. Gorkov before that meeting, and I have had no reason to connect with him since.

    To the best of my recollection, these were the only two contacts I had during the transition with persons who were or appeared to potentially be representatives of the Russian government.

    Disclosure of Contacts on My Security Clearance Form

    There has been a good deal of misinformation reported about my SF-86 form. As my attorneys and I have previously explained, my SF-86 application was prematurely submitted due to a miscommunication and initially did not list any contacts (not just with Russians) with foreign government officials. Here are some facts about that form and the efforts I have made to supplement it.

    In the week before the Inauguration, amid the scramble of finalizing the unwinding of my involvement from my company, moving my family to Washington, completing the paper work to divest assets and resign from my outside positions and complete my security and financial disclosure forms, people at my New York office were helping me find the information, organize it, review it and put it into the electronic form. They sent an email to my assistant in Washington, communicating that the changes to one particular section were complete; my assistant interpreted that message as meaning that the entire form was completed. At that point, the form was a rough draft and still had many omissions including not listing any foreign government contacts and even omitted the address of my father-in-law (which was obviously well known). Because of this miscommunication, my assistant submitted the draft on January 18, 2017.

    That evening, when we realized the form had been submitted prematurely, we informed the transition team that we needed to make changes and additions to the form. The very next day, January 19, 2017, we submitted supplemental information to the transition, which confirmed receipt and said they would immediately transmit it to the FBI. The supplement disclosed that I had “numerous contacts with foreign officials” and that we were going through my records to provide an accurate and complete list. I provided a list of those contacts in the normal course, before my background investigation interview and prior to any inquiries or media reports about my form.

    It has been reported that my submission omitted only contacts with Russians. That is not the case. In the accidental early submission of the form, all foreign contacts were omitted. The supplemental information later disclosed over one hundred contacts from more than twenty countries that might be responsive to the questions on the form. These included meetings with individuals such as Jordan’s King Abdullah II, Israel’s Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, Mexico’s Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Luis Videgaray Caso and many more. All of these had been left off before.

    Over the last six months, I have made every effort to provide the FBI with whatever information is needed to investigate my background. In addition, my attorneys have explained that the security clearance process is one in which supplements are expected and invited. The form itself instructs that, during the interview, the information in the document can be “update(d), clarif(ied), and explain(ed)” as part of the security clearance process. A good example is the June 9 meeting. For reasons that should be clear from the explanation of that meeting I have provided, I did not remember the meeting and certainly did not remember it as one with anyone who had to be included on an SF-86. When documents reviewed for production in connection with committee requests reminded me that meeting had occurred, and because of the language in the email chain that I then read for the first time, I included that meeting on a supplement. I did so even though my attorneys were unable to conclude that the Russian lawyer was a representative of any foreign country and thus fell outside the scope of the form. This supplemental information was also provided voluntarily, well prior to any media inquiries, reporting or request for this information, and it was done soon after I was reminded of the meeting.

    ***

    As I have said from the very first media inquiry, I am happy to share information with the investigating bodies. I have shown today that I am willing to do so and will continue to cooperate as I have nothing to hide. As I indicated, I know there has been a great deal of speculation and conjecture about my contacts with any officials or people from Russia. I have disclosed these contacts and described them as fully as I can recall. The record and documents I am providing will show that I had perhaps four contacts with Russian representatives out of thousands during the campaign and transition, none of which were impactful in any way to the election or particularly memorable. I am very grateful for the opportunity to set the record straight. I also have tried to provide context for my role in the campaign, and I am proud of the candidate that we supported, of the campaign that we ran, and the victory that we achieved.

    It has been my practice not to appear in the media or leak information in my own defense. I have tried to focus on the important work at hand and serve this President and this country to the best of my abilities. I hope that through my answers to questions, written statements and documents I have now been able to demonstrate the entirety of my limited contacts with Russian representatives during the campaign and transition. I did not collude, nor know of anyone else in the campaign who colluded, with any foreign government. I had no improper contacts. I have not relied on Russian funds to finance my business activities in the private sector. I have tried to be fully transparent with regard to the filing of my SF-86 form, above and beyond what is required. Hopefully, this puts these matters to rest.

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...text-jared-kushner-statement/article35779480/
     
  15. 明的凡

    明的凡 知名会员 ID:106409

    注册:
    2012-02-28
    帖子:
    10,712
    支持:
    960
    声望:
    173
    金钱:
    $117,264
    Any updates, @ccc village chief? When will Trump be impeached according to your fake news? :)
     
  16. ccc

    ccc 难得糊涂 ID:6614 管理成员 VIP

    注册:
    2003-04-13
    帖子:
    200,761
    支持:
    29,845
    声望:
    1,393
    金钱:
    $60,786
    没事儿,特朗普有完全特赦权,包括亲属和他自己。
     

分享此页面

扫描下面的二维码分享到微信!
http://bbs.comefromchina.com/threads/1589413/