As we all know – as we all have been told countless times over the past week or so – Donald Trump’s key advisor…who also happens to be his son-in-law…was involved in a nefarious, probably illegal, maybe treasonous effort to develop a “back-channel” means of communicating with Russia.
Obviously this “man” should be fired, then tried, prosecuted, jailed, then maybe tarred, feathered and boiled as well.
The entire basis for this story is an “anonymous letter”, supposedly in possession of the Washington Post, which broke this story. And The Post has refused to make its source known.
Thus this torrent of attack “journalism” relies exclusively on mainstream media believing what the Post published – without benefit of evidence whatsoever – and merrily passing it along to their viewers/readers/listeners.
Do you have a problem with that?
Here are the first paragraphs of Richard Pollock’s article at dailycaller.com. Please read them – then the rest of Mr. Pollock’s article – and see if you’re impressed:
The Washington Post editors refuse to publicly release the smoking gun “anonymous letter” that serves as the foundation of their sensational charge that White House advisor Jared Kushner sought a secret, back-channel to Russian officials.
The “anonymous letter” was part of a front-page article claiming the president’s son-in-law sought to set up a private communications channel to Russian officials during a discussion with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The piece was published Sunday and received high profile coverage throughout the long Memorial Day weekend.
“The Post was first alerted in mid-December to the meeting by an anonymous letter, which said, among other things, that Kushner had talked to Kislyak about setting up the communications channel,” the article’s three authors stated.
WaPo also claimed American intelligence agencies discovered the ploy through an intercepted open phone call by Kislyak to Moscow. Observers have noted that Kislyak, a seasoned spy, made the phone call on an “open line,” and therefore knew it was likely to be intercepted.
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 Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group contacted The Post’s national desk over the weekend, seeking a copy of the letter and an explanation why their editors withheld it from the public. WaPo did not reply to either The DCNF’s email or phone inquiries.
An anonymous letter?
An intercept from a veteran of espionage procedures who knew full well that the information he was putting out on an open line would easily be tapped and heard?
Let me ask you a question: does this look more like Russia is colluding with the Trump administration, or more that Russia is trying to damage it?
I have already blogged, numbers of times, about how much more involved with/beholden to Russia Hillary Clinton was than Donald Trump – leading to the very real suspicion that, if Russia were trying to sway the election, it would be to her, not him. And, unlike the Washington Post, I relied on a fully referenced article published by, of all sources, the New York Times: April 23, 2015 (before the paper hunkered down to Hillary-at-all-costs mode).
Now, you tell me who Russia wanted in the Oval Office.
But the sad reality of today’s “journalism” is that none of this matters. The fact that Russia is far more likely to want Hillary Clinton as President than Donald Trump? In order to try and bury Trump, they have to bury that story along with him.
When the Washington Post provides something to us besides an “anonymous letter” and information a veteran Russian spy clearly wanted us to see, let me know. Until then, you’ll pardon my skepticism.