Reply With Quote
he should have lost his clearance the day it was discovered he tried to set up extra-governmental crypto channel with Pootin.
He should lose his security clearance. But not just based on this.
He has had a long history of "forgeting" key things when he sudmited his security application form. He ammended it 3 times. Each time coming up with new excuses as to why he had to.
At one point he forgot to add over a 100 foreign names he said he forgot.
Here's a breakdown of each time he had to go back and change it.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jared-k...earance-forms/
he should have lost his clearance the day it was discovered he tried to set up extra-governmental crypto channel with Pootin.
Clinton had her own server
Destroyed it after was told not to
Hit hammer on 8 phones
Even though she said she wanted to use one device why server
back channels happen all the time
You tell me. It's not like emails to and from her didn't pass through other servers.
Why did he lie about all his foreign contacts?
Snowflakes desperate to create a moral equivalency.
you don't know what it means.
That he used a private email for government business is an actual equivalency, dimwit. No one is using value terms like good or bad.
I didn't say there was equivalency or not, did I? I did say liberals are desperate to have a moral equivalency though. Now I'll ask you the same question I asked tranny; what should happen to Kushner?
That he used a private email for government business is an actual equivalency, dimwit. No one is using value terms like good or bad.
you just doubled down on the fact that you dont know what moral equivalency means
Keep your re to yourself.
Or maybe you're just a dumb who doesn't get it. You just had it explained multiple times and you're still not grasping it.
No, this is what happens when people go on the attack regardless of whether they have a point, kind of what you're doing now, tranny.
BTW, SMH "You just had it explained multiple times and you're still not grasping it." This hasn't been that kind of back and forth, dumb .
Spurtacular:
Spurtacular: I didn't say there was equivalency or not, did I? I did say liberals are desperate to have a moral equivalency though.
spurraider21: you just doubled down on the fact that you dont know what moral equivalency means
Is/will the Kushner thing be on par with HRC? I doubt it; but I haven't ruled it out; we'll see how it plays out. This is precisely the desperation I was speaking of though.
Conversation about it goes much further than that starting point which you conviniently started off with. Spurraider was the last one to point it out, not the first.No, this is what happens when people go on the attack regardless of whether they have a point, kind of what you're doing now, tranny.
BTW, SMH "You just had it explained multiple times and you're still not grasping it." This hasn't been that kind of back and forth, dumb .
Spurtacular:
Spurtacular: I didn't say there was equivalency or not, did I? I did say liberals are desperate to have a moral equivalency though.
spurraider21: you just doubled down on the fact that you dont know what moral equivalency means
Is/will the Kushner thing be on par with HRC? I doubt it; but I haven't ruled it out; we'll see how it plays out. This is precisely the desperation I was speaking of though.
It started with this idiotic post:
Then Pavlov explained..
Then myself..
And then Fuzzy went on..
And then lastly, Spurraider just reiterated you doubling down on stupid and got you triggered about it calling him a re .
That he used a private email for government business is an actual equivalency, dimwit. No one is using value terms like good or bad.
You keep hanging Ls on yourself, stupid.
^^^
This is the desperation I speak of. At this point what do you think that Kushner did that was so wrong besides use a private e-mail on some occasions he speculatively shouldn't have? Whereas, the many degrees of f*cked up for Hillary is well-do ented. And even despite this obvious disparity, I still left the door open for maybe Kushner is being just as big of an ass hat. , you're dumb.
the point is nobody here, including your dreaded liberals have argued any sort of "moral equivalency." the fact that you keep using that term shows you dont know what it means
It was argued in the OP, ffs.
and then fuzzy explained to you how that isn't a moral equivalency
That he used a private email for government business is an actual equivalency, dimwit. No one is using value terms like good or bad.
Nothing happened to Hillary. Non-issue.
Sure, if you want to take the dimwit oversimplified approach and equate what could be a nothing burger with felonies.
More than one in this thread said he left hundreds of foreign contacts off his disclosure form. He never should have been able to start his job at all. Did you just miss all that when it happened AND when we said it here?
why does Clinton still have her security clearance?
You tell me. You're the one who thinks she should be in jail for multiple homicides.
Ask trump
But Hillary tho right?
lol
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions