Lock him up?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Because politics is anything but entertaining to me

Well it didn't used to be...lol

a reply to: imthegoat

Ok if I robbed car and only went a block . Jesus it's a metaphor not reality. Give it a break petty patty.
Some people.. can't get you for one thing they'll come at you from another direction just so they can act all superior.
Yeah dude ya got me ...

a reply to: Sillyolme

Even if this were equivalent, which it in no way is based on the info available, ignorance of the law was used as a campaign slogan for Hillary and she got 3 million more votes.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: luthier

Sure..a real estate mogul but can't remember that Hillary was taken to task for the exact same thing.

As I've already noted, "exact same thing" doesn't apply here when comparing this issue with Clinton's. I don't know why that false comparison keeps coming up. At best, they are loosely related, but it's not against the law to discuss job-related things on private email, that's why I mention that content matters more than just the oh-my-gosh-he-used-private-email knee-jerk reaction.

It's definitely worth looking into, though, but at this point, it's a relative non-issue.

originally posted by: bknapple32
Its 20170 technology is ever changing.

By Gads how long have I been sleeping and we still talking about HC and DT

a reply to: Sillyolme

So has the emails been subpoenaed and he took steps to destroy the requested evidence yet?

That tends to poke holes in the intent or not theory with Hillary's situation.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Sillyolme

I did get your point, it was just a poor analogy. Just trying to be helpful to get your message across better.

It's more than poor. It's shameless and self degrading.

Apparently, using private e-mails is a big thing in the W/H, it's not just Kushner :

Mr Kushner's lawyer has confirmed that "fewer than 100 emails" were sent through a private account.

The New York Times says five other aides also used private email accounts to deal with White House matters.

Mr Kushner's wife and Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump is said to be among them.

The paper has named the four other staffers as Steve Bannon, the former chief White House strategist; Reince Priebus, the former chief of staff; and advisers Gary D Cohn and Stephen Miller.

Link 1, Link 2, Link 3

Is there a recognized, intrinsic security problem with W/H or Administration servers ?

Is that why so many people insist on going outside of the loop ?

Or ... ?

You'd have to think, after the Clinton furore, that the new crew would think things through.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Bknapple32 is right you're either in favor of locking both of them up or none of them. My vote is to lock Hillary up.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Do you have any proof that any of Kushner's emails sent from his private email was classified?

Is a private email the same as a private server?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Do you have proof that Trump is a target under a criminal investigation?

Yes,lock him up. But first Hillary.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Lock people like you up!

The Bush White House lost, what, 22 million emails while using private servers for government business.

It's not about emails; it's always been about Clinton.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

It's not about emails; it's always been about Clinton.

And all the classified stuff flying all around.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Sums it up nicely.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Sillyolme

So what is the difference here

It seems that Hillary set a precedent...

After years of Internal review and congressional investigations, and a year of Trump screaming about it, the Trump administration has no excuse. This is clearly flagrant and intentional.

a reply to: randyvs

If you can't speak for yourself, I'm not going to watch your Youtoob vid.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Gryphon66

It's not about emails; it's always been about Clinton.

And all the classified stuff flying all around.

In the Bush White House? You should have told them where to find it then.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Sillyolme

The crime had to do not with having an email account, but with the handling of classified material.

You mean the "investigation" that concluded no "crime" had been committed?

It took an investigation and subpoena of over 30,000 personal emails to discern that potentially classified material had been shared.

It would seem you advocate an equally just investigation of the Trump Administrations use of private emails?

How else could we know if classified material is being sent or received?