Lock him up?

a reply to: UKTruth

I have read several articles.

It says he followed a nearly identical path as Clinton as far as the timeline.

It's also a way politicians have found ways around the law as Powell stated....

So in theory he is supposed to communicate everything through secure channels and with record.

a reply to: UKTruth

The big thing will be if, and I stress the word if, it turns out to be classified information.

that really is what this all comes down to when comparing to Clinton.

Regardless though of if it is or is not classified information, lets face it, in view of everything else going on just now in the administration I think we can all agree it was pretty stupid of him to have used a personal email account for this kind of stuff.

For me personally, I would not be comfortable with this kind of stupidity being in a position of power, but I know we might disagree on that.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: UKTruth

I have read several articles.

It says he followed a nearly identical path as Clinton as far as the timeline.

It's also a way politicians have found ways around the law as Powell stated....

So in theory he is supposed to communicate everything through secure channels and with record.

Did you read that he sent classified information? If not, he's done nothing wrong that we know of.
Forwarding an article from the NYT to a colleague using his private email is not an issue.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Why the hell not. You can do anything you want, and all you need to do is not have "intent" and you get off Scott free.

And you can fantasize about locking Trump's people up just after Hillary puts on her orange jumpsuit.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

The big thing will be if, and I stress the word if, it turns out to be classified information.

that really is what this all comes down to when comparing to Clinton.

Exactly.

As for using a private email, I seriously doubt anyone in govt positions cease all private email activity when they take office.

So far this thread is like comparing a drunk driver to someone who is found to be using a car.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

The big thing will be if, and I stress the word if, it turns out to be classified information.

that really is what this all comes down to when comparing to Clinton.

Exactly.

As for using a private email, I seriously doubt anyone in govt positions cease all private email activity when they take office.

I wouldn't expect them to give up using private email activity.

I would expect them however to have the brain to realise (particularly after the Clinton scandal) that using private emails for government business is just stupid.

That is my issue with this, I don't know if he has or has not mishandled any classified information like crooked Hilary did, I just know he has been a moron and I don't feel comfortable with this kind of stupidity having the ear of a president who seems to be on the verge of a war with North Korea.

a reply to: Sillyolme

I'm a die hard Trump supporter. I've always spoke put about Kushner, he's a fake jew. He owns 666 5th ave NYC. I agree, get him out of the white house.

originally posted by: angeldoll
Anyway, back at the ranch, his supporters should have recognized a dog and pony show ( his campaign) when he loved the chant "lock her up", only to change it after he won. Don't you just love how he shoos away the idea of locking her up, like it's a fly. Demonstrating that's all it was to him. He had no intentions of even trying it, because he knew he would fail.

To be fair, I've seen people defend Trumps campaign rhetoric of "lock her up."

I've had people tell me that "he never intended to pursue charges," and that his chants of "lock her up," were other people projecting their beliefs onto Trump.

I'm not kidding, and I was told that by a resident ATS member. That Donald Trump never said "lock her up," but instead that other people accused Donald of saying "lock her up."

These people revel in #alternativefacts

a reply to: UKTruth

Lol, is that was his attorney claims? Are you seriously using his attorney as a reference?

I think you do better by just saying wait and see what comes out.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: UKTruth

Lol, is that was his attorney claims? Are you seriously using his attorney as a reference?

I think you do better by just saying wait and see what comes out.

No, Politico explained what they know of the emails from his attorney, but they also included "there is no indication" that any classified information has been shared.
Right now the headline should really read "Kushner is doing what everyone else is doing in Washington".
Until such a time that there is proof classified information was shared, as is the case with Hillary, the claim of equivalence is rather strange.... almost like a leap on any news that can be used to make a thread about double standards...

a reply to: UKTruth

I made no equivelancies. I just said he isn't supposed to be using private email and not keeping the records as a top adviser to the president.

Just another case of how Trump is business as usual.

Was his emails routed through a hidden basement server or is it it just a private Google type email? If the server wasn't private and the contents of the email are not classified, it's not really the same thing as Clinton's situation.

I'm not taking politicos "sources close to the situation/ we verified the emails" seriously. The emails may exist but do they contain classified information and did they go through a private unsecure server?

Dems won't want to push this too much because it'll be reopen a can of Clinton worms.

If Kushner sent classified information from or to a private email then yea... lock him up.

I would be in jail if I did it, unlike some folks here I prefer we not have people above the law just so I can score imaginary political points that mean little.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So what is the difference here...except that it's trumps administration that is using private e mails.

Interesting...as a federal employee in an area with even higher security scrutiny than the average employee, I know that we are not supposed to conduct official business via private email or phones or any other private communication. But with that knowledge (gotta love annual training), it also matters as to the content that is discussed and exchanged.

Kushner apparently set up a family domain, not a private server on his property, as Clinton did. Furthermore, this part of the story matters:

There is no indication that Kushner has shared any sensitive or classified material on his private account, or that he relies on his private email account more than his official White House account to conduct government business. Aides say he prefers to call or text over using email.

Until it shows that there was sensitive or classified material sent over this email account, it will not at all be on the same level of illegality as Hillary Clinton, who knowingly sent classified information over a privately owned email server that she kept secreted away.

Kushner's internet domain is public record, and so far, it seems that he has not used the private email account exclusively for government business, as Clinton basically did, and especially important is that he didn't use it to discuss sensitive, classified government issues...again, like Clinton did.

So, you ask what the difference is, and it's pretty apparent if you're being objective about it. While this has the potential to be a 'gotcha moment,' like you're treating it in the OP, it's certainly far from being there yet. But, if he has done something worthy of prosecution, he should be prosecuted.

To flip the script, though, will you call for Clinton's prosecution if Kushner is prosecuted?

a reply to: UKTruth

To be fair, this is what everyone does in the federal government's employment as a whole. I have discussed work-related things via my personal phone on numerous occasions, even having other federal employees contact me via it (prior to getting a all-mighty Blackberry...yes, your tax dollars at work) when I was traveling.

But, I would never discuss sensitive things or PII (Personally Identifiable Information) via non-secure, non-work communication channels.

I feel that this is getting blown way out of proportion, but it appears that the investigation is in its infancy, so who knows where it could go.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Hilary set the precedence, the it's ok mindset. Neither were ok in my opinion... Maybe we should all have more Information Assurance training (you other military members know what I'm talking about).

a reply to: Sillyolme

There are several points of view here. The most important difference - so far - is whether or not it was just a personal email address on a government server or a personal email on 'another' server.

Any emails regarding government matters can be considered 'government property' and as such need to be kept in the public record that is law.

My with Ms. Clinton was that she basically stole public property by doing the State Departments business through email on a non-governmental server.

Like Clinton, Powell used a personal email address. However, there’s a big difference: Clinton hosted her email on a private server located in her home. Powell did not.

Many politicians use private addresses, but private servers like the one Clinton used are rarely seen, said John Wonderlich, a policy director at the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan group focused on government transparency, for a prior PolitiFact story.

www.politifact.com...

However, she may have gotten the idea from this fact:

The Bush Administration admits that as many as 22 political advisers to the president, including Karl Rove, used their Republican National Committee email accounts for White House related business. At the time, the RNC automatically purged emails after 30 days. Later, a White House spokesperson reported that as many as 5 million emails could have been lost from the White House's official server.

www.propublica.org...

And just WHY were RNC emails on White House servers in the first place - that can be construed as thief as well.

It's a complex mess - that needs to be stored out - with law and regulation - right now.

originally posted by: Dizrael
a reply to: Sillyolme

Hilary set the precedence, the it's ok mindset. Neither were ok in my opinion... Maybe we should all have more Information Assurance training (you other military members know what I'm talking about).

so....you know exactly what the classified material was on her server, and you know exactly what material CAN be given the classified designation.......maybe you can enlighten us with your "knowledge".....here's an example.....the public knows about some drone strikes because media has openly be able to prove them...but...ANY use of drones is considered "classified" .....so you can have a Miami herald newspaper article about a drone strike on Yemen, and yet a government employee can't disclose that same strike and what was used to do it, due to that information being "classified" by the government.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

He just keeps accidently being in possibly shady situations like with Adoptions...

Sounds a little familiar, bit no real conclusions should be made without proof.

He may just not have a real sense of what he should and shouldn't do.

a reply to: luthier

Sure..a real estate mogul but can't remember that Hillary was taken to task for the exact same thing.
No I'm not buying that we didn't know bull #. They are all well past the ninety day orientation phase.