1) be found in possession of classified materials, deny it,
2) refuse to hand over materials under court subpoena and then
3) wipe and destroy hard drives with a hammer to destroy court mandated evidence
4) conspire with the F B I to re-write damning evidence against him as "unclassified" when it was previously classified
5) be presumed innocent by motive from the head of the FBI (which is not the FBI's job)
6) complain that his political image has been smeared via FBI interference after ALL THIS has factually happened...
After all this, I hope he receives the same punishment Hillary did.
I actually don't care for Kushner at all, I'm just sayin
Pretty sure this guy was problematic since day 1. But I doubt it's any more significant than Hillary/Abedin/Weiner. But they should all be charged. Ridiculous after the Dem scandal.
1) be found in possession of classified materials, deny it,
2) refuse to hand over materials under court subpoena and then
3) wipe and destroy hard drives with a hammer to destroy court mandated evidence
4) conspire with the F B I to re-write damning evidence against him as "unclassified" when it was previously classified
5) be presumed innocent by motive from the head of the FBI (which is not the FBI's job)
6) complain that his political image has been smeared via FBI interference after ALL THIS has factually happened...
After all this, I hope he receives the same punishment Hillary did.
I actually don't care for Kushner at all, I'm just sayin
It is no longer a he, it is a they.
It appears as if the Trump administration plays fast and loose with the law.
If they worked for the CIA or FBI and mixing government with personal emails, they would be immediately fired.
Obviously no one really cares about this. It was something that Republicans were able to use for political advantage in the election. Some people have enough shame to pretend to want Jared "held accountable if it turns out blah blah blah" but this story will soon be forgotten like 99.9% of the time the same thing has happened.
Your framing shows your bias. Could it not have been simultaneously 1) a tool used by the GOP in the 2016 race to weaken the opposition 2) a legitimate issue concerning Clinton's fitness to serve?
I fear politics has clouded your judgment to such an extent that you only see facts through the lens of your partisanship. I think more spiritual release sessions with @senri may be in order for you.
It's way too stupid to be entertaining. Half the show would be Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon jerking each other off over ethno nationalistic buzzwords.
People are also forgetting that "LOCK HER UP" wasn't a call until it was disclosed by Comey, head of the FBI, that he had "Immediately Prosecutable Evidence" of her in criminal wrong-doing, apart from the whole Email fiasco. Then Comey was given orders from a mysterious non-biased higher-up to stand down and cease the investigation.
Your framing shows your bias. Could it not have been simultaneously 1) a tool used by the GOP in the 2016 race to weaken the opposition 2) a legitimate issue concerning Clinton's fitness to serve?
I fear politics has clouded your judgment to such an extent that you only see facts through the lens of your partisanship. I think more spiritual release sessions with @senri may be in order for you.
Obviously it's not a legitimate issue, and my rejection of that narrative is proof of the exact opposite of what you're claiming. Partisanship is the only reason anyone would claim to think that it was a legitimate issue. Even a real single-issue, IT-security voter wouldn't vote Trump.
I don't get the outrage, Hillary Clinton set the standard that it's A OK. I mean realistically anyone using private servers in the future should get off Scott free shouldn't they?
I don't get the outrage, Hillary Clinton set the standard that it's A OK. I mean realistically anyone using private servers in the future should get off Scott free shouldn't they?
The standard that it's OK predates Clinton, but dishonest hacks pretended to think it was a huge issue last year so people are laughing at the exposed hypocricy now.
The standard that it's OK predates Clinton, but dishonest hacks pretended to think it was a huge issue last year so people are laughing at the exposed hypocricy now.
CNN had talking heads on discussing Kushner and this email scandal.
I assumed they would go all in and go after him.
However, the panel suggested that all Kushner did was forward old contacts and emails from contacts using his private email (gmail, yahoo, hotmail, ????) to his new WH email account.
Should he have replied to the emails and said "Thanks for your email, you may contact me from now on using my new White House email at [email protected]."? Yes. But, even CNN thinks this scandal isn't really a scandal.
Your framing shows your bias. Could it not have been simultaneously 1) a tool used by the GOP in the 2016 race to weaken the opposition 2) a legitimate issue concerning Clinton's fitness to serve?
I fear politics has clouded your judgment to such an extent that you only see facts through the lens of your partisanship. I think more spiritual release sessions with @senri may be in order for you.
These are the thoughts that secrete from a man whose sweet encephalitic walls tighten as it moistures with the myelin juices that saturate his synapses.
Let him marinate, i promise you he will taste unlike you have ever sensed before. Allow him to soften slowly and eloquently. This is the nature of ascending the flesh towards The Nexus...
Violence/Genocide: Do not condone violence or genocide on a person or group of people. You are free to attack a person or groups ideas but you are crossing the line when calling for violence. This will be heavily enforced in threads with breaking news involving victims.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.