Replies

This is confusing because it’s poorly written. Kundra WAS chief technology officer until March 4; now he’s chief information officer as of March 5? Thus, he’s no longer associated with the office that was raided? If so, the raid wasn’t “at Obama appointee’s office” but at his former office. Am I right, or am I missing something? He/She only left 8 days ago. Plus he/she has been an advisor to ZERO since before the immaculate election. SO .. chances are good that the impropriety was going on while he/she (I mean seriously .. who names their kid "Kundra," and is he/she a male or female?) was head of the office. It doesn't necessarily mean that Kundra is part of the impropiety, but it will be fun to see what comes of it nonetheless. I mean, this is yet another DimoRAT Administration that told us that THIS will be "the most ethical .." after which they nominated tax cheats, Lobbyists, and now ..? All I know is that the first 52 days of this UH-dministration has been an absolute hoot (and yet the scariest, most disturbing thing I've ever seen)!

Sorry all for the crappy set up of my post. I typed too fast ..

that depends on the definition of ethical, it would seem the RATS and everybody else definitions are not the same. They have a different play book.