General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums'Back channels' are protocol for a president -- but not for a president-elect
By David Ignatius May 29 at 12:10 PM
Back channels have been used by every modern president, from John F. Kennedy to Barack Obama. If thats so, whats the problem with the pre-inauguration contacts between White House adviser Jared Kushner and two Russian intermediaries?
Its a fair question. But that doesnt mean that the right answer is a reflexive approval of Kushners contacts, as offered Sunday by Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, who said of such offline communication: Its both normal, in my opinion, and acceptable.
The devil here, as in most things, is in the details. Most analysts agree that its appropriate for presidents and their senior aides to use secret contacts to advance U.S. foreign policy goals. And its fairly routine for incoming administrations to have get-acquainted talks with foreign governments, too. Such back channels can add stability and predictability in foreign relations.
Whats not okay is when an incoming administration seeks to undermine the policies of the incumbent. We have one president at a time. Thats not just a political truism but a matter of law, enunciated back in 1799 in the Logan Act, which prohibits private meddling with official policy during a dispute. The fact that this statute has never been enforced criminally doesnt blunt its importance. And its not okay, either, for any citizen, even the son-in-law of the president-elect, to propose contacts that would use the communications tools of a foreign intelligence service to evade detection. As Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) said Sunday: You have to ask, well, who are they hiding the conversation from?
The secret Kushner contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and Kremlin-friendly banker Sergey Gorkov raise similar questions to Michael Flynns contacts with Kislyak. Flynn resigned as national security adviser in February after it was revealed that he had misled Vice President Pence and the public about whether, in a Dec. 29 conversation with Kislyak, he discussed easing anti-Russia sanctions after Trumps inauguration.
more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/05/29/back-channels-are-protocol-for-a-president-but-not-for-a-president-elect/
Me.
(35,454 posts)In it up to his neck
pansypoo53219
(20,990 posts)MousePlayingDaffodil
(748 posts)This is so fatuous that one must question whether it is intentional.
The POINT of this so-called "back channel" was that Kushner was seeking to take advantage of a secure Russian communications network so that Trump & Co. could communicate with Russian officials without U.S. intelligence officials being aware of what was being discussed.
By definition, it is impossible that such communications would be directed at "advancing U.S. foreign policy goals."
Part of the problem is that most in the press, be they on the left or the right, are pretty dimwitted.
underpants
(182,868 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)wanted HIS "back channel" to avoid the US govt 100% AND wanted it INSIDE the ENEMY'S CONSULATE!!
Russia isn't our enemy? She STOLE our ELECTION in a COUP. That's pretty much the definition of adversarial.
MousePlayingDaffodil
(748 posts)It seems as if the world passed into a "stupid beam" during last year's primary campaign, and has yet to emerge from it.
mopinko
(70,197 posts)by opening up the old ruble spigot is not diplomacy.
spanone
(135,861 posts)Vinca
(50,302 posts)It makes you wonder if Jared is just a garden variety spy. Maybe they thought he was brighter than Carter Page. LOL.