Jump to content

Ivanka Trump's use of personal email

Bobcat1

By Bobcat1
in Political Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

SmashMouth

SmashMouth

Posted
Posted

Once again, it's a Left vs Right circus. The Left wants to punish the Right for something their beloved Hilary did 1000 times over. At the same time, the Right wants to defend someone who did something wrong by pointing the finger at the Left and saying, "Well, we didn't do something near as bad as y'all...".

Some things never change. The truth is, Hilary should face a firing squad, and Ivanka should possibly have her privileges removed. They were both wrong in varying degrees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Once again, it's a Left vs Right circus. The Left wants to punish the Right for something their beloved Hilary did 1000 times over. At the same time, the Right wants to defend someone who did something wrong by pointing the finger at the Left and saying, "Well, we didn't do something near as bad as y'all...".

Some things never change. The truth is, Hilary should face a firing squad, and Ivanka should have her privileges removed. They were both wrong in varying degrees.

Can you give us an explanation of what she did wrong and what rules she has broken?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Which one

Who, Hilary or Ivanka?

Ivanka.   Be specific...there hasn't been any kind of investigation and you are already wanting to have her privileges revoked.

Maybe she's guilty of doing what every staffer has always done, but don't you think you need more evidence than what you have read in the news to revoke her clearance?

Or do you have inside knowledge we don't at this time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmashMouth

SmashMouth

Posted
Posted

I don't know if I have anymore knowledge than you. I can tell you what I know as public record:

According to the Presidential Records Act, senior White House staff members are required to preserve their professional communications, with the records eventually transferred to the National Archives. Electronic communications outside of official channels, such as private email or text messages on a staffer's personal phone, are supposed to be copied to a government account within 20 days.

By her lawyer's own admission, she wasn't clear on the rules at first. She used a private account to discuss White House business.

Now, I didn't say what privileges should be removed. You are assuming she should have her "clearance" revoked (whatever that means...).

The more you listen and absorb, and the less you just "knee-jerk" react, the better off you'll be. It's ok. Republicans (which I am) make mistakes too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

I don't know if I have anymore knowledge than you. I can tell you what I know as public record:

According to the Presidential Records Act, senior White House staff members are required to preserve their professional communications, with the records eventually transferred to the National Archives. Electronic communications outside of official channels, such as private email or text messages on a staffer's personal phone, are supposed to be copied to a government account within 20 days.

By her lawyer's own admission, she wasn't clear on the rules at first. She used a private account to discuss White House business.

Now, I didn't say what privileges should be removed. You are assuming she should have her "clearance" revoked (whatever that means...).

The more you listen and absorb, and the less you just "knee-jerk" react, the better off you'll be. It's ok. Republicans (which I am) make mistakes too.

lol...you were ready to remove her privileges and I'm the one that knee jerks.

I really don't care if she continues to work in the administration or not, but I'm willing to wait and let the facts come out.

I would imagine you would want the same consideration given to you and your career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmashMouth

SmashMouth

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

lol...you were ready to remove her privileges and I'm the one that knee jerks.

I really don't care if she continues to work in the administration or not, but I'm willing to wait and let the facts come out.

I would imagine you would want the same consideration given to you and your career.

It wasn't a knee jerk on my part. Her lawyers admitted to her wrong doing. Slap her on the hand and move on, you choose the punishment. But if we Republicans were smart, we would acknowledge her wrongdoing (by her lawyer's admission) and don't just sweep it under the rug like the Democrats did with HRC.  Was it an honest mistake? Maybe. People get in trouble for honest mistakes all the time.

As far as consideration for her career, she's a frigging fashion designer, right?! Lol. Seriously, I have no issues with her. My issue is we need to be accountable for what WE do. It sure as Hell works out a lot better when we are trying to chase down the other side...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hagar

Hagar

Posted
Posted

With Hillary’s record, I can’t believe the Dems will follow thru with threats of an investigation.  On the other hand, the MSM will gloss is over to make Hillary appear to be the victim and Ivanka the greatest traitor since Benedict Arnold.  Such is life in America today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Member Statistics

    46,201
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    JBarry68
    Newest Member
    JBarry68
    Joined


  • Posts

    • weonlyrun28toss
      Pineywoods Hoopfest, Lufkin Nov. 25-26/Post updates and results here

      By weonlyrun28toss · Posted

      naw, maaaaybe 7, definitely not 8 deep.  today im avoiding sitting by #10s parents, had to move away yesterday.   "put my son back in jub, put my son back in"  and then crying on every little touch of someone.    lets ball out today ktz!    
    • Cu Chulainn
      Orangefield 65 Livingston 83/FINAL

      By Cu Chulainn · Posted

      Very close game until the 2nd half (mostly the 4th) when Orangefield came unraveled. Worse defensive effort I have seen out of the Bobcats in three years. This team has to get back on D and quit getting beat over the top when pressing. Offensively, non ball handlers continually turn it over and their shot selection is poor. Basic basketball, such as: defensive hustle, boxing out, and taking care of the basketball are the areas the Bobcats need to work on most. Whitmire will get them on point, but he shouldn't have to coach effort at the Varsity Level.  We'll be at McnNeese this Friday night at 6pm.
    • TxHoops
      Susan Smith

      By TxHoops · Posted

      I don’t benefit from it, that’s not my area.  But the average cost to imprison someone is around $15k per year (on average in the US) and capital cases cost somewhere between $1.5-$3M with over half being overturned or reduced to life in prison anyway.  These numbers may be inflated since the last report I read but I’m sure it would be on both sides and higher on the DP side if anything. So what’s the point?  We feel better because we got to return the favor on someone (hopefully) who committed a heinous crime?  And I don’t know I can say we have “complicated” it. Which appeal should we cut out?  Our justice system has a pecking order and we have higher courts for a reason. When we are about to impose the ultimate judgment, should we cut steps that other cases have to save a buck?  Or do we not pay for an indigent person’s experts at the trial court level because it’s too expensive? Or do we just lock them up and throw away the key (unless we later find out they weren’t actually guilty, in which case we have a key and a life we haven’t unjustly ended) and save a ton of money?  Seems to me to be an easy and obvious solution but I’m more of a pragmatist.
    • setxathlete14
      2024 WOS Mustangs

      By setxathlete14 · Posted

      1 thing for certain. Coach Earned 3 more years to figure it out lol
    • Reagan
      Trump Wins

      By Reagan · Posted

      AMEN!

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...