Jared Kushner, the White House’s key diplomat and business innovator, did not disclose dozens of encounters with foreign leaders when he applied for top-secret security clearance, The New York Times reported on Thursday.

In order for him to gain access to the country’s best-kept secrets, the president’s son-in-law was required to report all contacts he had with foreign government officials over the past seven years. Kushner, however, omitted dozens of meetings, including ones with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the U.S., and Sergey Gorkov, the head of Russia’s state-owned Vnesheconombank. The Senate Intelligence Committee informed the White House two weeks ago that it sought to question Kushner about these meetings.

Linky

I'm sure it was just a coincidence.

(04-07-2017 01:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Jared Kushner, the White House’s key diplomat and business innovator, did not disclose dozens of encounters with foreign leaders when he applied for top-secret security clearance, The New York Times reported on Thursday.

In order for him to gain access to the country’s best-kept secrets, the president’s son-in-law was required to report all contacts he had with foreign government officials over the past seven years. Kushner, however, omitted dozens of meetings, including ones with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the U.S., and Sergey Gorkov, the head of Russia’s state-owned Vnesheconombank. The Senate Intelligence Committee informed the White House two weeks ago that it sought to question Kushner about these meetings.

Linky

I'm sure it was just a coincidence.

If he omitted "dozens," he probably listed "dozens." Missing some in the context of those numbers over 7 years is certainly easy to do. Now if he only listed 2 or 3, that would be different. Of course, this is Salon, so it could all be fiction.

The problem as I see it, is not that he omitted any meetings but that he is using Jamie Gorelick as his lawyer. She is arguably the single most culpable person for the 911 attacks. If it wasn't for her, there may never have been an attack.

This is par for the course with the Trump team.

a big nothing burger.

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

The propaganda machine is in overdrive lol

(04-07-2017 02:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

It wasn't a Democrat.

(04-07-2017 02:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

I can tell youve never had security clearance for anything. You really think Kushner had secrets before he got clearance. Dude they know the time and date of each time he took a leak for the last 20 years.

Bwahahahaha.

(04-07-2017 03:03 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

I can tell youve never had security clearance for anything. You really think Kushner had secrets before he got clearance. Dude they know the time and date of each time he took a leak for the last 20 years.

Bwahahahaha.

You missed the point. The point isn't that we wouldn't find out. It's that he tried to deceive.

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

(04-07-2017 03:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 03:03 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

I can tell youve never had security clearance for anything. You really think Kushner had secrets before he got clearance. Dude they know the time and date of each time he took a leak for the last 20 years.

Bwahahahaha.

You missed the point. The point isn't that we wouldn't find out. It's that he tried to deceive.

Since you had no point to begin with, it's easy to miss.

(04-07-2017 03:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 03:03 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

I can tell youve never had security clearance for anything. You really think Kushner had secrets before he got clearance. Dude they know the time and date of each time he took a leak for the last 20 years.

Bwahahahaha.

You missed the point. The point isn't that we wouldn't find out. It's that he tried to deceive.

Haha. You know his intent.

You're embarrassing yourself

Why would he try to hide that information?

(04-07-2017 03:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why would he try to hide that information?

Why are you so desperate to pin something anything on Trump and/or his surrogates?

(04-07-2017 03:03 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

I can tell youve never had security clearance for anything. You really think Kushner had secrets before he got clearance. Dude they know the time and date of each time he took a leak for the last 20 years.

"They" know this yet you're worried about the New York Times????

You're embarrassing yourself now.

(04-07-2017 03:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 03:03 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

I love it. This guy keeps secrets about meetings with the Russians to gain Security Clearance and you are concerned about the Times?

I can tell youve never had security clearance for anything. You really think Kushner had secrets before he got clearance. Dude they know the time and date of each time he took a leak for the last 20 years.

"They" know this yet you're worried about the New York Times????

You're embarrassing yourself now.

Repeating Fit's posts? You're embarrassing yourself now.

(04-07-2017 03:08 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(04-07-2017 02:49 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

Quote:Mr. Kushner’s omissions were described by people with direct knowledge of them who asked for anonymity because the questionnaire is not a public document.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us...clearance/

It's nice to know that the New York Times has a contact willing to divulge some of the most highly confidential personal information of applicants for Security Clearances for political purposes. Information that only the applicant, OPM and China are privy too. The only people guilty of malfeasance here is the New York Times and their contacts at OPM.

Maggie Haberman penned the article, she is the one of 2 who sat on the Susan Rice story. So predictable.