Somebody explain to me how Peter Kadzik is still employed by the US government

The thing is, that's a big piece of substance. I know too many people that read those sites and become closed minded bigots and hate mongerers because it's what they surround themselves with.

As for the story, I have no idea what it's about but was posted by islstl and linked to breitbart. I don't read fiction. While the story is likely true because a credible outlet reported on it, breitbart spin surely is not.

 

He also posted the same story on CNN. You have no substance and simply are a troll.

 

On Kadzik....

"Peter Kadzik only began his career at the Department of Justice in 2013, according to a Daily Caller report. He was largely unknown to the American public until his name appeared in a WikiLeaks email dump. It appears Kadzik and John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair, are old friends.

Podesta and Kadzik went to Georgetown Law School and remained close. One leaked email dated earlier this year reportedly showed the two men talking about celebrating Podesta’s birthday. The day after Hillary Clinton testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, John Podesta, Peter Kadzik, lobbyist Vincent Roberti, and some other Washington, D.C. power brokers, all went out to dinner together, according to the emails leaked by Julian Assange. In an email sent from Kadzik to Podesta in May of last year, the DOJ official asked his old friend to get his son a job on the Clinton campaign."

It is undeniable that Podesta and Kadzik have known each other for years. Emails confirm they are still socially connected. Emails confirm that Kadzik asked Podesta to get his son a job with the Clinton campaign. Now Kadzik is the US Asst AG who is participating in the investigation of Clinton's emails. Can you not see the corruption and behind the scenes payoffs here?

 

Cool, then I would suggest not linking to them.

 

Again he posted the same thing from CNN and not a word on that from you. Stop trolling.

 

My God your dense. I've told you twice now my point is not about the story but about "news sites" that instantly lose you credibility. Isl basically agreed by saying he doesn't read that site which he shouldn't. But he shouldn't link it either because his message gets lost. It would be like me linking to a story written in crayon. Doesn't matter if it's 1p percent accurate because the other stories written in crayon are about superheroes.

 

Again, only a weak minded individual attempts to discredit the "source" as opposed to the content. The content was PROVEN legit as the same story ran on CNN.

You have offered only YOUR OPINION as to why X site is not legit. ZERO SUBSTANCE.

 

Only a troll would try a deflection as you have. Read the title of the OP. Address that or shut up!