Slashdot Mirror
Democrats Intend To Probe Ivanka Trump's Use of Personal Email In Next Congress (go.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ABC News: Amid reports that first daughter and White House senior advisor Ivanka Trump exchanged hundreds of official government business emails using a personal email account, top Democrats on Capitol Hill "want to know if Ivanka complied with the law" and in the next Congress plan to continue their investigation of the Presidential Records Act and Federal Records Act. Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat who's in line to become the next chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee next year, promises any potential investigation into Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump's emails won't be like the "spectacle" Republicans led in the Clinton email probe.
The Oversight committee has jurisdiction over records and transparency laws, and Cummings helped write an update to the Presidential and Federal Records Acts that was signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2014. That measure mandates that every federal employee, including the President, forward any message about official business sent using a private account to the employee's official email account within 20 days. "We launched a bipartisan investigation last year into White House officials' use of private email accounts for official business, but the White House never gave us the information we requested," Cummings, D-Md., noted. "We need those documents to ensure that Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, and other officials are complying with federal records laws and there is a complete record of the activities of this Administration. My goal is to prevent this from happening again -- not to turn this into a spectacle the way Republicans went after Hillary Clinton. My main priority as Chairman will be to focus on the issues that impact Americans in their everyday lives."
The Oversight committee has jurisdiction over records and transparency laws, and Cummings helped write an update to the Presidential and Federal Records Acts that was signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2014. That measure mandates that every federal employee, including the President, forward any message about official business sent using a private account to the employee's official email account within 20 days. "We launched a bipartisan investigation last year into White House officials' use of private email accounts for official business, but the White House never gave us the information we requested," Cummings, D-Md., noted. "We need those documents to ensure that Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, and other officials are complying with federal records laws and there is a complete record of the activities of this Administration. My goal is to prevent this from happening again -- not to turn this into a spectacle the way Republicans went after Hillary Clinton. My main priority as Chairman will be to focus on the issues that impact Americans in their everyday lives."
(nt)
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Just charge both Hillary and Ivanka now with violating Espionage Act and be done with it already. Let the chips fall where they may.
I assume you're talking about the whole "gender" definition thing? Cause there were a lot of poeple explaining why it was dumb. For instance, a good percentage of people (1/200) are born with two sets of genitals. The percent of people who present normally but not just an XX or XY genome is higher than that. When you're talking about the government messing up 4.5 million people's lives, it matters. Esp. since there is no benefit.
And note, that's all pure biology. If you factor in transgender people (and I personally think you should), it gets more ridiculous. But you don't have to.
TL;DR the dictionary is usually a bad source for detailed information. Heck, even laws tend to use words in ways differently than the dictionary.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Yet the judges seem to think that the lawsuits against him have enough merit to continue. And when he goes through deposition, his tax returns will come out. Anyone with a clue can see what's going on, which begs the question... why are you such a fucking clueless idiot?
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Who didnâ(TM)t deliberately set up a private email server and spread classified and top secret documents like it was confetti to swathes of people without clearance.
Itâ(TM)s zero about right/wrong, correct process, even the law. Itâ(TM)s about being as big a set of hypocritical assholes as is possible, always trying to outdo the other guy.
If Trump junior deserves censure, Clinton deserves to be subject to the penalties for unauthorized disclosure of classified information. In the United States this is a crime under the Espionage Act of 1917. Those who are found in violation of this crime against the government face broad and wide-ranging criminal sanctions. The bollocks that she didnâ(TM)t know etc never flew.
The e-mails in question were sent before Ivanka was a Federal employee; she literally had NO legal access to a Government e-mail account at the time.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
You might want to take your refresher briefings, then.
The things you describe usually fall into a lot of nice labels like "violations", "infractions", "procedural errors", and the like, but they very rarely end up as "felonies", because the applicable statute is one that includes that high bar of intent, by stipulating that the perpetrator must "knowingly" commit the act.
Indeed, that "felony" label is typically only reserved for someone who's about to be indicted for a lot of other related crimes, and for good reason: The security community has worked hard over the last hundred years or so to develop a culture of forgiving loyalty. Honest mistakes are usually forgiven, and written off with a minor warning, removal of access, or removal of clearance, but usually no attempt to pursue criminal charges or other long-lasting ramifications. The system intentionally errs on the side of caution, preferring to let even the most egregious violations pass rather than risk prosecuting an innocent mistake and creating a potential traitor. In doing so, there's a much greater chance that someone will come forward and report violations, rather than hide in fear that they might be held liable.
I spent a good number of years working in the defense industry, and I've seen plenty (probably a 3-digit number) of "spills", "slips", and "mistakes". I've only seen one person actually be accused of having that criminal level of intent, though... and that was mostly due to him leaving the country immediately after committing several violations. If he ever comes back, I'm sure there will be plenty of interesting discussions including that "felony" label.
Justice is a funny thing, in that the reality usually matters less than the perception. In matters that are necessarily kept secret, there will seldom be satisfaction that justice was actually served. Justice is only assured when there is faith that the judicial process is always applied consistently. That's precisely why I think Mrs. Trump's server should also be subject to a full investigation, with all the same review, and the same fussing over the implications of whatever dozen problems are actually found. I'd expect the same process if a Pentagon official were found to run his own email server, too, or even a lowly base commander in the field. Like it or not, a precedent has been set, and it must now be applied evenly.
That said, I'd also prefer to do without the media circus that surrounded the Clinton investigation. This is now routine. A personal email server was found that might hold sensitive or classified information, so we go through the process. It's not newsworthy, it's not political, and it's not something that should skew public perception. Fix the problems, give a good stern warning to whatever moron approved the idea, and let's get on with running the country, shall we?
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.