Huh. Peter Navarro used private emails for official business

[Bugsy McGurk]

What’s more, he refused to turn them over.

Wingers are no doubt incensed, no?

No?

Justice Department asks judge to order former Trump adviser Peter Navarro to return federal records — CNN Politics

The Justice Department has asked a judge to order former Trump White House trade adviser Peter Navarro to return federal records they say he wrongfully kept after leaving the administration.

apple.news

 

[RickWA]

What’s more, he refused to turn them over.

Wingers are no doubt incensed, no?

No?

Justice Department asks judge to order former Trump adviser Peter Navarro to return federal records — CNN Politics

The Justice Department has asked a judge to order former Trump White House trade adviser Peter Navarro to return federal records they say he wrongfully kept after leaving the administration.

apple.news

...Wait...this is NOW newsworthy and subject to scrutiny and outrage now that a non-Democrat may have done it? Bugsy self-outs as DNC propagandist asset yet again. Not so long ago you were rejecting it as issue. Funny stuff...in a pathetic sort of way. Enjoy your hacktastic day.

 

[EatTheRich]

I mean, it became illegal in 2017.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

...Wait...this is NOW newsworthy and subject to scrutiny and outrage now that a non-Democrat may have done it? Bugsy self-outs as DNC propagandist asset yet again. Not so long ago you were rejecting it as issue. Funny stuff...in a pathetic sort of way. Enjoy your hacktastic day.

This GOP hack can’t even begin to criticize Navarro. His Trump cultism runs too deep. So he just rants like a child.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

I mean, it became illegal in 2017.

That doesn’t stop the idiotic whataboutism and deflection from Trump cultists, as we see above.

 

[RickWA]

This GOP hack can’t even begin to criticize Navarro. His Trump cultism runs too deep. So he just rants like a child.

Link to Bugsy's critique of ANY Democrat ever accused of such? You've had YEARS to do so. I'll wait.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Link to Bugsy's critique of ANY Democrat ever accused of such? You've had YEARS to do so. I'll wait.

This thread is not about a Democrat. It’s about a Republican. Your only response is to engage in whataboutism as to Navarro, and you then engage in whataboutism about me. Anything but confront and condemn Navarro’s conduct. Why? Because you’re a Trump cultist with absolutely nothing to say.

 

[RickWA]

This thread is not about a Democrat. It’s about a Republican. Your only response is to engage in whataboutism as to Navarro, and you then engage in whataboutism about me. Anything but confront and condemn Navarro’s conduct. Why? Because you’re a Trump cultist with absolutely nothing to say.

Nope. You’ve jumped to a heretofore unproven thing to condemnation of a non-Democrat…when you exhibited silence in a PROVEN case with a Democrat. Many, in fact.

Yep. Direct DNC propagandist asset Bugsy…reporting for internet duty 24x7/365z

 

[EatTheRich]

Nope. You’ve jumped to a heretofore unproven thing to condemnation of a non-Democrat…when you exhibited silence in a PROVEN case with a Democrat. Many, in fact.

Yep. Direct DNC propagandist asset Bugsy…reporting for internet duty 24x7/365z

I think perhaps part of the interest comes from the evident bad faith of those who viciously condemned Clinton’s use of a private email when it was legal, but can’t condemn the use of a private email by Navarro, Ivanka Trump, and others after it became illegal. That they did it knowing it was illegal and controversial also strongly suggests that it is because they had something to hide.

 

[RickWA]

I think perhaps part of the interest comes from the evident bad faith of those who viciously condemned Clinton’s use of a private email when it was legal, but can’t condemn the use of a private email by Navarro, Ivanka Trump, and others after it became illegal. That they did it knowing it was illegal and controversial also strongly suggests that it is because they had something to hide.

(D)ifferent, of course.

 

[EatTheRich]

(D)ifferent, of course.

Yes, legally using a private system on the suggestion of your predecessor who without controversy did the same in order to prevent a security breach is different from illegally using a private system to conceal corruption.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Nope. You’ve jumped to a heretofore unproven thing to condemnation of a non-Democrat…when you exhibited silence in a PROVEN case with a Democrat. Many, in fact.

Yep. Direct DNC propagandist asset Bugsy…reporting for internet duty 24x7/365z

Your ridiculous lies do not excuse your whataboutism or your refusal to even comment on the topic - Navarro’s email practices. Your Trump cultism does not allow you to go there. I get it.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

(D)ifferent, of course.

Different indeed. One legal, the others illegal.

Yet you condemn the legal by the D and refuse to even comment on the illegal by the R’s.

You do know that you’re an unprincipled GOP hack, right?