Kushner uses private emails for official business

[Bengalzona]

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/21/705561586/kushner-used-private-email-to-conduct-official-business-house-committee-says?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20190321&fbclid=IwAR2dlYHCn1jV3NzKBZ9mbTY9YjSmzJkDVh9q14k5rK8BiblWLJyIM6tcXMw

Quote:Kushner Used Private Email To Conduct Official Business, House Committee Says

Quote:Jared Kushner's attorney told the House Committee on Oversight and Reform that Kushner uses private messaging applications and personal email to communicate about official White House matters, the committee wrote in a letter to White House Counsel Pat Cipollone on Thursday.

The oversight panel said that Kushner, the president's son-in-law and a senior White House adviser, had been using WhatsApp as part of his official duties — an apparent violation of a law governing White House records.

The committee said that it learned about the use of private email and WhatsApp from a December 2018 conversation from Kushner's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, who also represents the president's daughter, Ivanka Trump.

Meanwhile, the committee said that Ivanka had been receiving official emails on her personal account, and has not been forwarding them to her official White House account as required by law. Her lawyer confirmed this as well, according to the committee.

Lowell contended in a letter to Cummings Thursday afternoon that some of the information the committee states is incorrect, including that Lowell confirmed Kushner used a messaging app to communicate "with foreign 'leaders' or 'officials.' " He said he told the committee that Kushner follows White House protocols and referred questions to the White House counsel.

Lowell also said his discussion with the committee about Ivanka Trump's emails was specifically about the period before September 2017. He told the committee at their meeting "now she always forwards official business to her White House account."

Aside from the Kushners, the House committee said other officials such as the former deputy national security adviser K.T. McFarland and former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon used their personal email accounts to talk about the "transfer of sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia." The panel produced a report last month alleging that the Trump administration sought to rush the transfer of American nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia in potential violation of the law.

The House oversight committee first launched their investigation into use of personal email "in violation of the Presidential Records Act and White House policy" back in 2017, Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Md., wrote in Thursday's letter.

But Cummings said that the White House has failed to produce many documents that he and his panel have demanded.

Cummings said that the White House had not followed through with a briefing on this matter that they had promised him, and had not produced "a single piece of paper to the Committee ... in this or any other investigation" since Democrats took over the majority in the House.

In his letter to Cipollone, Cummings demanded that the White House produce documents related to their investigation into this matter by April 4.

"The White House has received Chairman Cummings' letter of March 21st. As with all properly authorized oversight requests, the White House will review the letter and will provide a reasonable response in due course," Steven Groves, White House spokesman who handles oversight issues said in a written statement to NPR.

Hillary Clinton was criticized by Republicans throughout the 2016 presidential campaign for using a private email to conduct official business during part of her tenure as secretary of state in the Obama administration.

The requirement for her to preserve her communications was outlined in a law which is similar to the one which governs the preservation of White House records.

NPR's Tamara Keith contributed to this story

"But his emails!!!! His emails!!!1!!!11!!!!!"

[Belsnickel]

For the record, this is a different matter than Clinton's issue. Because Jared and Ivanka are in the White House proper, their communications are subject to records laws that cabinet officials are not subject to. I also don't think anyone really defended Clinton's use of a private email account for official business, but stated that she didn't necessarily violate any laws in doing so (a separate issue from the the classified information, which likely was a legal violation that was not deemed prosecutable).

[Bengalzona]

(03-21-2019, 08:21 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: For the record, this is a different matter than Clinton's issue. Because Jared and Ivanka are in the White House proper, their communications are subject to records laws that cabinet officials are not subject to. I also don't think anyone really defended Clinton's use of a private email account for official business, but stated that she didn't necessarily violate any laws in doing so (a separate issue from the the classified information, which likely was a legal violation that was not deemed prosecutable).

Are we 'great again' yet?

[*bfine32*]

Where any of the emails about yoga?

FWIW, if the kids do not know how to process classified documents (I assume this is what the issue is) then their access to such data should be revoked.

[Belsnickel]

(03-21-2019, 08:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Where any of the emails about yoga?

FWIW, if the kids do not know how to process classified documents (I assume this is what the issue is) then their access to such data should be revoked.

It doesn't much matter if they had classified information in their personal emails. The issue is the Presidential Records Act. It requires that all documents of the President, Vice-President, and their direct staff within their offices be archived. The use of official White House communication methods ensures compliance with this law.

[BmorePat87]

Dude used whatsapp to contact foreign officials?

jfc...

[*bfine32*]

(03-21-2019, 08:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: It doesn't much matter if they had classified information in their personal emails. The issue is the Presidential Records Act. It requires that all documents of the President, Vice-President, and their direct staff within their offices be archived. The use of official White House communication methods ensures compliance with this law.

Well then, their access should be revoked. I hope lawmakers pursue it. COMSEC should not be a partisan issue. 

[Vas Deferens]

lock her up?

[*michaelsean*]

Cool. Lock Koosh (that’s how cool people say it) and Hills (Again. Cool.) up.

[*bfine32*]

(03-21-2019, 08:21 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: For the record, this is a different matter than Clinton's issue. Because Jared and Ivanka are in the White House proper, their communications are subject to records laws that cabinet officials are not subject to. I also don't think anyone really defended Clinton's use of a private email account for official business, but stated that she didn't necessarily violate any laws in doing so (a separate issue from the the classified information, which likely was a legal violation that was not deemed prosecutable).

Sorry, I missed this earlier. Did you type that with a straight face?

Seems lots of people were defending it by: "well so and so did it", ect...

[Vas Deferens]

(03-21-2019, 09:25 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Cool. Lock Koosh (that’s how cool people say it) and Hills (Again. Cool.) up.

sounds good to me.  

(03-21-2019, 09:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sorry, I missed this earlier. Did you type that with a straight face?

Seems lots of people were defending it by: "well so and so did it", ect...

if everyone tells you to jump off a bridge are you going to do it?  or are you going to man up and practice what you preach?  i have a feeling your dearest daddy doesnt have the sack or mental capacity to do a god damn thing.  remember that.

[*bfine32*]

(03-21-2019, 09:35 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: sounds good to me.  


if everyone tells you to jump off a bridge are you going to do it?  or are you going to man up and practice what you preach?  i have a feeling your dearest daddy doesnt have the sack or mental capacity to do a god damn thing.  remember that.

Pretty sure I said Kusner and Baby T. should have access revoked if didn't follow the book and I would hope POTUS does the same. If not maybe the lawmakers will.

I was simply amused by the assertion that no one defended Hills. 

[Belsnickel]

(03-21-2019, 09:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sorry, I missed this earlier. Did you type that with a straight face?

Seems lots of people were defending it by: "well so and so did it", ect...

And I think a lot of people, even some of those same ones, said it shouldn't be a thing and there should be policy against it. The whataboutism was more about whether ti was legally a problem or not. At least that's how I remember it all, but that was 3+ years ago at this point, so it doesn't much matter.

[Bengalzona]

(03-21-2019, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well then, their access should be revoked. I hope lawmakers pursue it. COMSEC should not be a partisan issue. 

IMO

[hollodero]

(03-21-2019, 09:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sorry, I missed this earlier. Did you type that with a straight face?

Seems lots of people were defending it by: "well so and so did it", ect...

That's not defending it, it's putting it in perspective.

You of all people, so often accused of defending Trump and always quite upset about that, should appreciate differences like that.

[*bfine32*]

(03-21-2019, 10:21 PM)hollodero Wrote: That's not defending it, it's putting it in perspective.

You of all people, so often accused of defending Trump and always quite upset about that, should appreciate differences like that.

Oh, I stand corrected. No one defended it; they put it in perspective. 

As to my defending Trump: Sure, I defend him sometimes; especially from ridiculous accusations. I also blame him when the case warrants. Simply found the "no one defended Hills" comment to be funny; hell the whole DNC did (I mean put it in perspective)

[hollodero]

(03-21-2019, 10:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, I stand corrected. No one defended it; they put it in perspective. 

As to my defending Trump: Sure, I defend him sometimes; especially from ridiculous accusations. I also blame him when the case warrants. Simply found the "no one defended Hills" comment to be funny; hell the whole DNC did (I mean put it in perspective)

Well, that's the DNC's job, in a way. Defending her, which is still different than putting it in perspective. I admit it's a thin line at times. I for one thought Hillary was quite careless with her emails and this was more than just a blunder and totally disqualifying. But learning how many others were just as careless, very much including the guy that wanted to hang her for it, let me rethink that stance a bit. By that I am not defending her. I very much question anyone's reason to stand with Trump because of her emails though. Because, his phone (and then some things).

It's quite similar to me believing almost any US politician is legally bribable. It makes less sense to throw that at one person if almost anyone else is just as bad in that regard. That's the perspective. Still it's a bad thing for every single politician, and I would not defend it.

Finally and more of a sidenote, as for Trump, sure there are ridiculous accusations warranting a defense, but also unforgivable moments that are unmatched by anyone. Forgiving them looks like a defense at times, an incredibly frustrating one to watch. I think hence the possibly at times too sharp rhetorics of anti-Trump folk like me.

[Benton]

(03-21-2019, 08:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Where any of the emails about yoga?

FWIW, if the kids do not know how to process classified documents (I assume this is what the issue is) then their access to such data should be revoked.

They aren't kids, they're adults. I get that it takes the edge off to paint them as kids just bungling along in dad's company, but they're over 18. In Campaign Trump's America, hed be incarcerated by now.

[*bfine32*]

(03-21-2019, 11:12 PM)Benton Wrote: They aren't kids, they're adults. I get that it takes the edge off to paint them as kids just bungling along in dad's company, but they're over 18. In Campaign Trump's America, hed be incarcerated by now.

Well they're POTUS' kids. No "edge taking off" intended. I said their access should be revoked at a minimum and criminal charges filed at maximum. Not sure how that's taking the edge off. 

[Bengalzona]

(03-21-2019, 08:21 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: For the record, this is a different matter than Clinton's issue. Because Jared and Ivanka are in the White House proper, their communications are subject to records laws that cabinet officials are not subject to. I also don't think anyone really defended Clinton's use of a private email account for official business, but stated that she didn't necessarily violate any laws in doing so (a separate issue from the the classified information, which likely was a legal violation that was not deemed prosecutable).

Another difference: This is not an accusation. The attorneys for Kushner and Ivanka both stated that they did this.

So, basically, they did this.