Kushner uses private email to communicate with top WH staff.

[ezgeze]

Actually if you had read the article, he created this email after he took office. That kind of craps on your whole theory now doesn't it.

Exactly like I said.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...43071?lo=ap_b1

These usually forwarded news articles or political commentary and most often occurred when someone initiated the exchange by sending an email to his personal rather than his White House address.”

[Deleted]

Pardon me for thinking that when the FBI investigates you, there is criminal behavior. I mean, maybe I am just naive because I have never been the subject of multiple (dozens?) FBI investigations over the years.

Does it apply to a special counsel investigation as well. I'm guessing not, thus rhetorical.

[Edge-]

Exactly like I said.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...43071?lo=ap_b1

Given that Hillary's emails were reviewed based off of allegations, shouldn't Kushner be subject to the same scrutiny?

Or are we giving him a pass?

[Zan15]

The law in question factually has no intent standard, at all. This is well documented. Just sayin...

Pardon me for thinking that when the FBI investigates you, there is criminal behavior. I mean, maybe I am just naive because I have never been the subject of multiple (dozens?) FBI investigations over the years.

open mouth
insert foot

So then i guess we have a lot of CONFIRMED criminals in the white house and around Trump, including Trump himself.
i mean FBI investigation = criminal

right?
i mean don't be all naive now, you agree right?

[Tijuana]

Still irrelevant, since A> it was determined by that same investigation that the evidence didn't support prosecution anyway, and more importantly, B> this had absolutely nothing to do with Clinton's use of a private e-mail server, and indeed, most of the offending e-mails in question were initiated and sent from government e-mail accounts.



Yeah, that's basically insane. You're admitting that, to you, accusation is the same as a verdict. So I assume you similarly presume that the Russians have been manipulating Trump's campaign and administration? Since, y'know, there's an FBI investigation.

So which Trump campaign officials do you agree are criminals? Or are you going to walk this claim back, too?

Why are you equating counter intelligence investigations to criminal wrong doing? Those are not the same thing.

Your premise is ridiculous but, since you ask, I would say Manafort is for sure dirty...of something...somewhere. Flynn acts like a guy that is being blackmailed right as we speak. Carter Paige was factually NOT a part of campaign staff, but he generally seems like a douche, and everyone knows they commit more crimes.

Hillary and Bill have proven time and again, one cold hard truth: Convicting either of them for anything is like trying to nail jello to the wall. Nobody gets investigated that many times, without having done something wrong along the way.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh the irony.

Why is that ironic? Trump has never been investigated by the FBI, if that is what you mean.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually if you had read the article, he created this email after he took office. That kind of craps on your whole theory now doesn't it.

How many did he unlawfully delete? I want to see how his score is, to see if he can beat HRC.

[Blade Wolf]

Why are you equating counter intelligence investigations to criminal wrong doing? Those are not the same thing.

Your premise is ridiculous but, since you ask, I would say Manafort is for sure dirty...of something...somewhere. Flynn acts like a guy that is being blackmailed right as we speak. Carter Paige was factually NOT a part of campaign staff, but he generally seems like a douche, and everyone knows they commit more crimes.

Hillary and Bill have proven time and again, one cold hard truth: Convicting either of them for anything is like trying to nail jello to the wall. Nobody gets investigated that many times, without having done something wrong along the way.

- - - Updated - - -



Why is that ironic? Trump has never been investigated by the FBI, if that is what you mean.

- - - Updated - - -



How many did he unlawfully delete? I want to see how his score is, to see if he can beat HRC.

but hillary!

[Endus]

Why are you equating counter intelligence investigations to criminal wrong doing? Those are not the same thing.

Given that espionage is a crime, not really.

Plus, the accusations here are significantly worse than anything aimed at Clinton, so what's your argument here, honestly? That you think Trump campaign officials are so much more criminal than Clinton might've been (but definitively is not)?

Hillary and Bill have proven time and again, one cold hard truth: Convicting either of them for anything is like trying to nail jello to the wall. Nobody gets investigated that many times, without having done something wrong along the way.

At least you're clear that you're making up bullshit out of irrational hatred, here. Makes it clear where you're coming from, at least, and that it's not based on any assessment of facts or reality.

[Tijuana]

open mouth
insert foot

So then i guess we have a lot of CONFIRMED criminals in the white house and around Trump, including Trump himself.
i mean FBI investigation = criminal

right?
i mean don't be all naive now, you agree right?

What are you on about? Why are you tying me to Trump?

[Stop Pretending]

How many did he unlawfully delete? I want to see how his score is, to see if he can beat HRC.

So if he deleted less, he's less guilty? That's like asking two pedophiles who raped fewer kids, then going " See my guy isn't as bad as yours!!!"

[Endus]

Why is that ironic? Trump has never been investigated by the FBI, if that is what you mean.

Even aside from the pedantry of saying "the Trump campaign is being investigated but not Trump himself", which your claim here rests upon, you're ignoring prior investigations. Where Donald Trump was one of the specific targets being investigated, along with his father and the Trump Management Company. https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...b61_story.html

[Tijuana]

Given that espionage is a crime, not really.

Plus, the accusations here are significantly worse than anything aimed at Clinton, so what's your argument here, honestly? That you think Trump campaign officials are so much more criminal than Clinton might've been (but definitively is not)?



At least you're clear that you're making up bullshit out of irrational hatred, here. Makes it clear where you're coming from, at least, and that it's not based on any assessment of facts or reality.

You are just factually incorrect. The FBI investigation in to Russia election interference is factually a counter intelligence investigation. Everyone knows that so, you won't do well trying to lie here about that fact. I mean, we are not going to go handcuff Putin, if that is where you think this is going. top kek

I don't need you to speak for me. Rebut a point I made, or kindly stop using me as your straw man.

You question my facts and reality, while lying about the Russia investigation. Ok, then. Sure.

- - - Updated - - -

but hillary!

Doing it rong.

"but her emails!"

[Endus]

You are just factually incorrect. The FBI investigation in to Russia election interference is factually a counter intelligence investigation. Everyone knows that so, you won't do well trying to lie here about that fact. I mean, we are not going to go handcuff Putin, if that is where you think this is going. top kek

That counter intelligence is part of the investigation does not mean there are no criminal acts being investigated. Espionage is a criminal act. Your pedantry isn't just pedantry, it's pointless pedantry.

[Tijuana]

Even aside from the pedantry of saying "the Trump campaign is being investigated but not Trump himself", which your claim here rests upon, you're ignoring prior investigations. Where Donald Trump was one of the specific targets being investigated, along with his father and the Trump Management Company. https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...b61_story.html

I don't subscribe to that rag, so I can't read your link.

You probably just don't understand what those cases are all about, not being an American, or in real estate. They find a landlord who has a ratio of minority tenants that is not exactly the same as the population in the city. Then they sue or file charges for corporate documents to find out if there is a racist policy causing this, or if it's just random. During the course of the lawsuit, they at some point will settle, in favor of adopting policies going forward that are approved by the plaintiff, usually some sort of advocacy group. They almost always settle on the terms of the new policy, and they almost never find that there was in fact a racist policy to begin with. If the Trumps had been found guilty of some sort of racist act, believe me, you would have heard about it, and it would have prevented his victory.

- - - Updated - - -

So if he deleted less, he's less guilty? That's like asking two pedophiles who raped fewer kids, then going " See my guy isn't as bad as yours!!!"

I just want to see if anyone can get to her high score, without using 6 lawyers to push the buttons for her.

- - - Updated - - -

That counter intelligence is part of the investigation does not mean there are no criminal acts being investigated. Espionage is a criminal act. Your pedantry isn't just pedantry, it's pointless pedantry.

Oh...you! You are so silly, Endus. You really make me laugh sometimes.

[Endus]

I don't subscribe to that rag, so I can't read your link.

I really don't think the FBI investigation into Trump's housing shenanigans in the '70s is cutting-edge information anyway. Though lul at calling one of the top newspapers in the world a "rag".

You probably just don't understand what those cases are all about, not being an American, or in real estate. They find a landlord who has a ratio of minority tenants that is not exactly the same as the population in the city. Then they sue or file charges for corporate documents to find out if there is a racist policy causing this, or if it's just random. During the course of the lawsuit, they at some point will settle, in favor of adopting policies going forward that are approved by the plaintiff, usually some sort of advocacy group. They almost always settle on the terms of the new policy, and they almost never find that there was in fact a racist policy to begin with. If the Trumps had been found guilty of some sort of racist act, believe me, you would have heard about it, and it would have prevented his victory.

You realize you're confessing that you're a blatant hypocrite, right?

According to you, an FBI investigation means they're guilty, whether or not charges were filed. But now, suddenly, because it's Trump, that same principle doesn't apply.

Because you aren't operating under some basic principle, you're manipulating facts to support your cause, which is blind obeisance to and support of Trump.

[Tijuana]

I really don't think the FBI investigation into Trump's housing shenanigans in the '70s is cutting-edge information anyway. Though lul at calling one of the top newspapers in the world a "rag".



You realize you're confessing that you're a blatant hypocrite, right?

According to you, an FBI investigation means they're guilty, whether or not charges were filed. But now, suddenly, because it's Trump, that same principle doesn't apply.

Because you aren't operating under some basic principle, you're manipulating facts to support your cause, which is blind obeisance to and support of Trump.

What are you on about now? Like you say, the old Trump thing is well documented. I don't need to read your tabloid to know what happened.

Where did I say every FBI investigation means someone is guilty? Why are you lying so much? It's just this bizarre combination of comedy and sad, when you keep making things up. Pathetic.

Why do you need to question my character, just because I exposed your lie? Look, I'm not the one trying to manipulate people with untruths here. When you point your finger at me, you have three more pointing back at you.

I factually did not vote for Trump. Why not just make your argument honestly, instead of resorting to slander, virtue signals, and lies? Are your positions so weak, that they require dishonesty to convince?

[DarkTZeratul]

Where did I say every FBI investigation means someone is guilty?

Right here:

Pardon me for thinking that when the FBI investigates you, there is criminal behavior. I mean, maybe I am just naive because I have never been the subject of multiple (dozens?) FBI investigations over the years.

[Endus]

What are you on about now? Like you say, the old Trump thing is well documented. I don't need to read your tabloid to know what happened.

Where did I say every FBI investigation means someone is guilty? Why are you lying so much? It's just this bizarre combination of comedy and sad, when you keep making things up. Pathetic.

Pardon me for thinking that when the FBI investigates you, there is criminal behavior.

Not making anything up, just able to remember things you said earlier today.

You do realize that your post history is, like, right there, right?

[Tijuana]

Not making anything up, just able to remember things you said earlier today.

You do realize that your post history is, like, right there, right?

This should be easy then. Show me where I said every FBI investigation means the person is guilty. I'll wait.

[Endus]

This should be easy then. Show me where I said every FBI investigation means the person is guilty. I'll wait.

Asked and answered. Is there a reason you're not reading your own re-linked posts?

[Kujako]

Asked and answered. Is there a reason you're not reading your own re-linked posts?

I think he'll go the "criminal activity is not guilt" route by claiming that no one is guilty unless they get convicted.