I listened to CNN today (I needed a laugh).

To paraphrase CNN:

The big news today is that Trump's son-in-law Kushner is being investigated for influencing the election. But, investigators say there is no evidence.

Major Questions (Intelligent people should ask):

1) Isn't a member of a political campaign suppose to push for his side to win?

and,

2) Why is Kushner being investigated if there is no evidence?

Is it that our education systems have failed to educate Democrats? 

Persecution before prosecution. 

Persecution before prosecution.?

Interesting point. 

Kushner investigated for setting up backchannel secret communication channels with Kremlin.
Get thyself edgemicated. 

The snowflakes are melting. 

Isn't it the whole point of an investigation to gather evidence? 

Isn't a member of a political campaign suppose to push for his side to win?


By getting an oppositional eneny government to interfere in an election?
Now that's rich. 

Isn't it the whole point of an investigation to gather evidence??



That won't register... 

No evidence? How about this...

Kushner and Russian Ambassador discussed setting up secret communications channel with the Kremlin. 

By getting an oppositional eneny government to interfere in an election?
Now that's rich.

How did the Russians interfere with the election? 

Kushner and Russian Ambassador discussed setting up secret communications channel with the Kremlin.

You have evidence of that, right? Plus, that's not illegal. 

Coughing returns - more from CNN:
 

Such obvious desperation from the left.

It gets worse everyday here on KU.

The TDS meltdown continues 

I'm not sure why you think throwing Hillary out there is going to all of a sudden make Kushner innocent. I can't even say good try. 

Kushner is innocent.

You know......... "Innocent until proven guilty".

When you can come up with the "guilty" party....... come back and see us. 

Told you... 

Yes, you did.

I guess that makes Hillary innocent too since she was never found guilty of anything on all of a gazillion investigations the Republicans had against her.

I'm glad the Senate intelligence committee now wants everything from Trump all their documents Etc. Should be interesting to watch this all play out. 

If they find nothing....then what will you say? 

If they find nothing....then what will you say??

"It was Bush." 

then what will you say??



He's as innocent as Hillary... 

BTW...setting up back channel communications is normal says the Sec of State. The gov't does it all the time. You need to quit reading the liberal press or your bound to be disappointed a lot. 

If you don't like Trump, campaign against him next time. Don't start a bunch of investigations looking for a crime that does not exist.

This is getting quite tiresome.

By the way, if you guys want a news channel free of opinion watch OAN. It's refreshing seeing a news channel that sticks to the facts. 

By the way, if you guys want a news channel free of opinion watch OAN. It's refreshing seeing a news channel that sticks to the facts.?

Please. You know it's trash when they claim that fox is too left.

Charles Herring, in an interview in CPAC, said "Fox is a great platform, a lot of conservatives like it, it gets outstanding ratings. There is nothing wrong with Fox. The problem is that if you take the channel lineup, the sources of national news tend to lean to the left?and all we have is Fox." 

I watch Fox, but they lean a little to the right with regular news, though they present both sides to issues (Unlike CNN and MSNBC, which are a mouthpiece for the Democrat party).

OAN just gives you facts without any slant. I like that. 

If you don't like Trump, campaign against him next time. Don't start a bunch of investigations looking for a crime that does not exist.

Like "Obama is wiretapping me..Investigate"? Little late for that.

Kushner Implicated, Without Evidence
I have heard no implications. But I have heard there is evidence that could implicate. See the difference? 

I have heard no implications. But I have heard there is evidence that could implicate. See the difference?

What? 

According to "sources", right? 

witchywoman --- 2 days ago - quote - hide comments
No evidence? How about this...

Kushner and Russian Ambassador discussed setting up secret communications channel with the Kremlin.?

So what? That's done all the time. What you forgot to say was that it was Flynn and the Russian Ambassador that were having the conversation with Kushner sitting in. But that's normal for the liberals only telling half the story. You also forgot to say that the FBI didn't say he was guilty of anything or that they were looking to charge him with doing anything. You also forgot that he is more than willing to talk about the meeting. Why don't you tell the whole story? 

Kushner Implicated, Without Evidence
I have heard no implications. But I have heard there is evidence that could implicate. See the difference??

That's funny. What evidence are you talking about? What's your source? Every article I read didn't say a word about evidence. 

I sure am tired of the half truths and the speculation stated as fact by the left. You guys never learn and will be burned again.