Ivanka Trump used a personal email account to send mails about government business

[Jedidiah]

Seriously? The daughter (and advisor) of the man who campaigned on the use of private email by his opponent uses private email for government business - and because it was "before the briefing," she is not culpable? Seriously? How is it even remotely possible that "private email for government business" was not a huge clanging gong in her mind...?

It seems to me one has to argue that she was either criminally negligent - or criminally stupid.

If you have read what has been posted so far and made this post, you must be criminally stupid.

[Mountain Man]

IIRC she claimed that she [Hillary] had forgotten it [her training in the handling of government communications].

In which case she should have been forced to resign or impeached due to mental incompetence.

[Sparko]

Then there is something wrong with the way you educate on the topic though that does not excuse Hillary.

It's the government. It's what they do.

[Charles]

You seem to be missing the point where they said "many of them in violation of federal records rules". And those have been explained in the article as family schedules. FOUO at best. Heck, you could have access to their domestic schedules with a FOIA request.

You seem to be missing this:

Trump used her personal account to discuss government policies and official business fewer than 100 times — often replying to other administration officials who contacted her through her private email, according to people familiar with the review.

And the security is alarmingly low:

After she told White House lawyers she was unaware that she was breaking any email rules, they discovered that she had not been receiving White House updates and reminders to all staffers about prohibited use of private email, according to people familiar with the situation.

[Charles]

Perhaps they could start with the public school system.

Yep. Very good idea. It is starting to happen in part of Europe - at least to some degree. Feel free to join us.

[Charles]

It's the government. It's what they do.

I know but they could do better. Or?

[Bill the Cat]

You seem to be missing this:

Since she is not an elected official, government employee, or political appointee, she can discuss government policies with whomever she pleases on whatever media she pleases. She is not making policy, so she isn't bound by any of the policy discussion rules. Heck, I work for the government and I discuss government policy on TWeb. It isn't against the law. The only "official business" she discussed was her and her family's official travel schedule.

And the security is alarmingly low:

Again, she is only a family member, so she is not bound by those prohibitions, except for the official schedule.

[Bill the Cat]

I know but they could do better. Or?

One would think. It's a running joke in our IT community just how bad the Cyber Awareness training is and how they could pay a trained monkey to make it better.

[Bill the Cat]

Yep. Very good idea. It is starting to happen in part of Europe - at least to some degree. Feel free to join us.

Just don't type in caps...

[Charles]

Since she is not an elected official, government employee, or political appointee, she can discuss government policies with whomever she pleases on whatever media she pleases. She is not making policy, so she isn't bound by any of the policy discussion rules. Heck, I work for the government and I discuss government policy on TWeb. It isn't against the law. The only "official business" she discussed was her and her family's official travel schedule.

Too simplified and you know it. We all know she has a great influence on the president and discusses political topics with him. You don't discuss all details of your job in here and I guess no poster in here would share all information about their jobs on tweb. And there is a difference between discussing policy and government business:

Using personal emails for government business could violate the Presidential Records Act, which requires that all official White House communications and records be preserved as a permanent archive of each administration. It can also increase the risk that sensitive government information could be mishandled or hacked, revealing government secrets and risking harm to diplomatic relations and secret operations.

There are many different opinions on what was in those mails. I dislike how fast you conclude on it.

[Bill the Cat]

Too simplified and you know it. We all know she has a great influence on the president and discusses political topics with him. You don't discuss all details of your job in here and I guess no poster in here would share all information about their jobs on tweb. And there is a difference between discussing policy and government business:

It's the law. Regardless of who "has influence", they are not an employee, elected official, or appointee. The prohibitions do not apply to her.

There are many different opinions on what was in those mails. I dislike how fast you conclude on it.

Just going by what is in the story.

[carpedm9587]

If you have read what has been posted so far and made this post, you must be criminally stupid.

So I responded to post #8 (which was as far as I got before I had to run). What exactly in posts 1-7 made this post "criminally stupid?"

[carpedm9587]

OK, so let's punish her the same way we punished Hillary, but to an understandably lesser extent.

I'm not sure why "to a lesser extent." It seems Ivanka used a private email address - but there is no indication of what server it was hosted on (except that it was not a private server), which suggests the possibility that it was gmail, or yahoo, or some other public server. I'd like to know which server.

And this was AFTER her father campaigned on the "email scandal." So she needed a "briefing" to make it absolutely clear to her, after multiple "lock her up" rallies, that using a private email system for government business was not acceptable?

I come back to "extremely negligent" or "extremely stupid." (I used the term "criminally" before, but meant it as an expression meaning "extremely" - not as an actual measure of legality, for all of the reasons cited in the previous thread).

But I have to admit that I am not surprised that so many on the right are rallying to her defense, and so many on the left rallying to her conviction. Consistency is not exactly the hallmark of the far right or far left.

[Cow Poke]

I'm not sure why "to a lesser extent."

Proportionality. Hillary wasn't punished. 33,000 emails - she should have known better, signed a document saying she knew better, actually used a private server (shows intent), tried to hide (remember BleachBit?), lied......


Come on, Carpe, REALLY?

[Cow Poke]

But I have to admit that I am not surprised that so many on the right are rallying to her defense, and so many on the left rallying to her conviction. Consistency is not exactly the hallmark of the far right or far left.

Rallying to her defense? So far there's no "there" there. But if it makes you feel better, I can jump up and down and yell "LOCK HER UP"!!!!

Carpe - Hillary was a SENIOR DIPLOMAT - a SECRETARY OF STATE, a CABINET member! Ivanka is a family member.