Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23
  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,203
    Post Thanks / Like

    Silence on the Right

    "Illegal Ivanka"


    Ivanka Trump used a personal email account to send hundreds of emails about government business last year


    Ivanka Trump sent hundreds of emails last year to White House aides, Cabinet officials and her assistants using a personal account, many of them in violation of federal records rules, according to people familiar with a White House examination of her correspondence.

    White House ethics officials learned of Trump’s repeated use of personal email when reviewing emails gathered last fall by five Cabinet agencies to respond to a public records lawsuit. That review revealed that throughout much of 2017, she often discussed or relayed official White House business using a private email account with a domain that she shares with her husband, Jared Kushner.

    The discovery alarmed some advisers to President Trump, who feared that his daughter’s prac*tices bore similarities to the personal email use of Hillary Clinton, an issue he made a focus of his 2016 campaign. He attacked his Democratic challenger as untrustworthy and dubbed her “Crooked Hillary” for using a personal email account as secretary of state.

    Some aides were startled by the volume of Ivanka Trump’s personal emails — and taken aback by her response when questioned about the practice. She said she was not familiar with some details of the rules, according to people with knowledge of her reaction.

    The White House referred requests for comment to Ivanka Trump’s attorney and ethics counsel, Abbe Lowell.

    In a statement, Peter Mirijanian, a spokesman for Lowell, acknowledged that the president’s daughter occasionally used her private email before she was briefed on the rules, but he said none of her messages contained classified information.


    Ivanka Trump often discussed or relayed official White House business last year using a private email account with a domain that she shares with her husband, Jared Kushner. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
    “While transitioning into government, after she was given an official account but until the White House provided her the same guidance they had given others who started before she did, Ms. Trump sometimes used her personal account, almost always for logistics and scheduling concerning her family,” he said in a statement.

    Mirijanian said Ivanka Trump turned over all her government-related emails months ago so they could be stored permanently with other White House records.

    And he stressed that her email use was different from that of Clinton, who had a private email server in the basement of her Chappaqua, N.Y., home. At one point, an archive of thousands of Clinton’s emails was deleted by a computer specialist amid a congressional investigation.

    “Ms. Trump did not create a private server in her house or office, no classified information was ever included, the account was never transferred at Trump Organization, and no emails were ever deleted,” Mirijanian said.

    Like Trump, Clinton also said she was unaware of or misunderstood the rules. However, Clinton relied solely on a private email system as secretary of state, bypassing government servers entirely.

    Both Trump and Clinton relied on their personal attorneys to review their private emails and determine which messages should be retained as government records.

    Clinton originally said none of the messages she sent or received were “marked classified.” The FBI later determined that 110 emails contained classified information at the time they were sent or received.

    [Inspector general blasts Comey and says others at FBI showed ‘willingness to take official action’ to hurt Trump]

    Austin Evers, executive director of the liberal watchdog group American Oversight, whose record requests sparked the White House discovery, said it strained credulity that Trump’s daughter did not know that government officials should not use private emails for official business.

    “There’s the obvious hypocrisy that her father ran on the misuse of personal email as a central tenet of his campaign,” Evers said. “There is no reasonable suggestion that she didn’t know better. Clearly everyone joining the Trump administration should have been on high alert about personal email use.”

    Ivanka Trump and her husband set up personal emails with the domain “ijkfamily.com” through a Microsoft system in December 2016, as they were preparing to move to Washington so Kushner could join the White House, according to people familiar with the arrangement.

    The couple’s emails are prescreened by the Trump Organization for security problems such as viruses but are stored by Microsoft, the people said.

    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.

    Another category of less-substantive emails may have also violated the records law: hundreds of messages related to her official work schedule and travel details that she sent herself and personal assistants who cared for her children and house, they said.

    People close to Ivanka Trump said she never intended to use her private email to shroud her government work. 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.

    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.

    Revelations about Clinton’s personal email system led to an FBI investigation of whether she had mishandled classified information. The scandal shadowed Clinton throughout the 2016 White House race, culminating in then-FBI Director James B. Comey’s controversial decision to hold a news conference a few months before the election to announce his conclusion that she had been reckless with government secrets but that there was not sufficient evidence she had intended to skirt the law.

    During the campaign, Donald Trump said the Democratic nominee’s “corruption is on a scale we have never seen before” and called her personal email use “bigger than Watergate.”

    Trump supporters still chant “Lock her up!” at his rallies, and the president, nearly two years into his administration, continues to tweet about Clinton’s emails.

    “Big story out that the FBI ignored tens of thousands of Crooked Hillary Emails, many of which are REALLY BAD,” he tweeted in August, referring to a Fox News story about claims that the bureau did not scrutinize all her emails. “Also gave false election info. I feel sure that we will soon be getting to the bottom of all of this corruption. At some point I may have to get involved!”

    Ivanka Trump first used her personal email to contact Cabinet officials in early 2017, before she joined the White House as an unpaid senior adviser, according to emails obtained by American Oversight and first reported by Newsweek.

    [Ivanka Trump shuts down her namesake clothing brand]

    In late February 2017, she used her personal email to contact Small Business Administration chief Linda McMahon and propose they meet to explore “opportunities to collaborate.” The following month, she emailed Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, suggesting that their staffers meet to discuss ways to collaborate on “locational/workforce development and k-12 STEM education.”

    While her messages were largely about government work, Trump was not then subject to White House records rules.

    When she joined the White House on March 30, Trump pledged to comply “with all ethics rules,” responding to complaints that her voluntary role gave her all of the access and perks of the White House — but none of the legal responsibilities or constraints.

    “Throughout this process I have been working closely and in good faith with the White House counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role,” she said in a statement at the time.

    But Trump continued to occasionally use her personal email in her official capacity, according to people familiar with the review.

    Her husband’s use of personal email for government work drew intense scrutiny when it was first reported by Politico last fall. The revelation prompted demands from congressional investigators that Kushner preserve his records, which his attorney said he had. At the time, administration officials acknowledged to news organizations, including the New York Times and Politico, that Ivanka Trump had occasionally used a private account when she joined the White House.

    [Kushner used private email account for some White House business]

    But Trump had used her personal email for official business far more frequently than known, according to people familiar with the administration’s review — a fact that remained a closely held secret inside the White House.

    “She was the worst offender in the White House,” said a former senior U.S. government official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal dynamics.

    After discovering the extent of her email use in September 2017, White House lawyers relied on Lowell, Ivanka Trump’s attorney, to help review her personal emails to determine which were personal and which were official business, according to the people.

    The White House Counsel’s Office did not have access to her personal account and could not review it without invading her privacy and possibly violating privileged communications with her attorneys, people familiar with the review said.

    After his review, Lowell forwarded emails that he had determined were related to official business to Ivanka Trump’s government account, a move he viewed as rectifying any violations of the records law, they said.

    Lowell’s review found fewer than 1,000 personal emails in which Trump shared her official schedule and travel plans with herself and her personal assistants, according to two people familiar with the review.

    Separately, there were fewer than 100 emails in which Trump used her personal account to discuss official business with other administration officials.

    The scope of her personal email use had not emerged in response to American Oversight’s records request, which sought Trump’s correspondence with Cabinet agencies in early 2017. Most internal White House communications are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

    “I’m disappointed — although not entirely surprised — that this administration disregarded clear laws that they more than anyone should have been aware of,” Evers said.

    In many cases, government officials contacted Ivanka Trump first at her personal email address. That was the case with a note she received in April 2017 from Treasury Department official Dan Kowalski, who was seeking to set up a meeting between the president and the secretary general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, an international economic group of which the United States is a member.

    “I apologize for reaching out to you on your personal email for this, but it is the only email I have for you,” he wrote, according to an email obtained by American Oversight.

    “For future reference my WH email is [redacted],” Ivanka Trump replied. “Thanks for reaching out and making this introduction.”

    But other times, Trump used her private email to initiate official business.

    In April 2017, she used her personal email to write to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s chief of staff, Eli Miller, suggesting that he connect with her chief of staff, Julie Radford. The email chain, obtained by American Oversight, was copied to Radford’s government account.

    “It would be great if you both could connect next week to discuss [redacted],” she wrote. “We would love your feedback and input as we structure.”


    Ivanka Trump used a personal email account to send hundreds of emails about government business last year
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  2. #2
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,772
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Anything top secret?
    To serve man.

  3. Thanks Squatch347 thanked for this post
  4. #3
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    The main point is that, after a campaign in which her father raised this issue relentlessly, anyone in Trump's administration thinking they could, in any way use a private & unsecured email to conduct government business from the Whitehouse is an example of stunning stupidity and gross hypocrisy.

  5. Thanks MindTrap028 thanked for this post
    Likes CowboyX liked this post
  6. #4
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,203
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Anything top secret?
    We don't know yet, need a full investigation to find out. But does it matter?
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  7. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    But does it matter?
    It doesn't. Simply using a private non-secure email for official business is inviting a certain risk of danger (disregarding the issue of hypocrisy). Even if they discover that no actual classified or top-secret information was transmitted, the hypocrisy is blatant. Further, Ivanka had no control over any information that was and could have been transmitted to her by others over the unsecured email, so her not sending secret stuff doesn't guarantee that no secret stuff could be sent to her and therefore present on the unsecured email service.
    The lawyers will go through the content with a fine-toothed comb to show that nothing damaging was transmitted, but that's beside the point. Also, there could be information there which, at first glance might seem innocuous and not top secret (ex: like who will be where and when), but nobody knows how some potential attackers could use it to do harm until it's too late.

  8. Likes CowboyX liked this post
  9. #6
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,077
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    I think it might now be a little awkward when the crowd chants "Lock her up!" at Trump rallies.

  10. Likes CowboyX liked this post
  11. #7
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,772
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    ---For the non biased---
    The issue of gov business on private unsecured servers is a problem in Washington. It is like security in this area snuck up on the gov, and now they are playing catch up. It is embarrassing that anyone in the gov to not be aware of this issue, much more so for anyone with Trump in their name. However only a fool would suggest that all instances of this are inherently equal. The janitor emailing his material requests from home, is nothing like the Secretary of Defense sending nuke codes from her Yahoo account. I doubt the gov has any punishment schedule for minor infractions, that are not cool, but not harmful in any way.
    I am of course not surprised that this distinction is being ignored by the left who really just want to punish their opponents.

    -----



    Quote Originally Posted by FUTURE
    The main point is that, after a campaign in which her father raised this issue relentlessly, anyone in Trump's administration thinking they could, in any way use a private & unsecured email to conduct government business from the Whitehouse is an example of stunning stupidity and gross hypocrisy.
    I agree with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by COWBOY
    We don't know yet, need a full investigation to find out. But does it matter?
    Yea, it matters. Because putting top secret documents at risk is criminal.
    Where as general public information stuff, is not.
    Hence the laws about handling top secret info.

    It is the difference basically a parking ticket level infraction.
    vs manslaughter.

    Did they implement any punishment standards after the Hillary debacle?
    To serve man.

  12. Thanks Squatch347 thanked for this post
  13. #8
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,203
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    the Secretary of Defense sending nuke codes from her Yahoo account.
    That was done? Or is this ridiculous hyperbole?

    ---------- Post added at 10:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Yea, it matters. Because putting top secret documents at risk is criminal.
    Where as general public information stuff, is not.
    Support please.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  14. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,252
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    The right's attack on Clinton for her emails was horribly over-wrought. She did wrong, but it was deemed not a crime, and it didn't endanger the US in any appreciable way. She was arrogant, careless, and disengenuos.

    Ivanka's actions are less significant than Hillary's. Still, there is hypocracy on the right, but we already knew that. We also know it exists on the left. None of this is actually very important.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  15. Likes MindTrap028 liked this post
  16. #10
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,772
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by COWBOY
    That was done? Or is this ridiculous hyperbole?
    Hyperbole to highlight distinction of degrees.

    Quote Originally Posted by COWBOY
    Support please.
    That it was done, or that there are criminal laws protecting top secret info?

    or that the janitor communicating his work times or some such is not covered under any criminal law?
    To serve man.

  17. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Hyperbole to highlight distinction of degrees.
    It seems you only wish to highlight the distinction which suits your side. We could just as easily point out the distinction between two cases where information was inadvertently leaked because of the use of unsecured emails and in one case that information was used to cause harm and another case there was no actual damage/harm suffered as a result of the security risk, then neither Hillary's nor Ivanka's actions did any actual harm. But again, it's the principle behind the use of unsecured emails which is important, not whether actual information which could be used against the US was transmitted, as I already pointed out in post #5.
    Couple that with Trump supporters chanting "Lock her up!" for an entire campaign, and this is indeed a case of extreme hypocrisy and stupidity - not really surprising for the Trump administration on its mission to Rake America Great Again.

  18. #12
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,203
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post


    That it was done, or that there are criminal laws protecting top secret info?

    or that the janitor communicating his work times or some such is not covered under any criminal law?
    I'll take anything.

    ---------- Post added at 11:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Hyperbole to highlight distinction of degrees.
    Which wasn't allowed when it was Hillary...go check the threads, I dare ya.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  19. #13
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,772
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by FUTURE
    It seems you only wish to highlight the distinction which suits your side.
    Not really, I am holding both to the same standard.

    Quote Originally Posted by FUTURE
    We could just as easily point out the distinction between two cases where information was inadvertently leaked because of the use of unsecured emails and in one case that information was used to cause harm and another case there was no actual damage/harm suffered as a result of the security risk, then neither Hillary's nor Ivanka's actions did any actual harm.
    That is a distinction that could be made. The law regarding top secret doesn't make that distinction, so I don't think it is a very good or reasonable distinction.
    I get the "no harm no foul" idea for sensitive info. But the distinction I pointed out comes before that. Namely, relevance of the information. The more important, the bigger the deal.

    Quote Originally Posted by FUTURE
    But again, it's the principle behind the use of unsecured emails which is important, not whether actual information which could be used against the US was transmitted, as I already pointed out in post #5.
    Why? I only care about security in areas that require security. I could care less if the janitor uses a secure e-mail. I care greatly if the president, and people doing top secret stuff use secure e-mail.
    This "principle" you are appealing doesn't make any sense except in its relation to sensitive information. .. which not everyone in gov is involved in.

    I get your point about it creating possible problems. But the example you listed is a problem for the sender, not the receiver.
    I mean, top secret stuff shouldn't be sent to any private e-mail. the fact that the gov allows that to happen or be a possibility is a major issue, that is not created by a gov worker having a private e-mail. .. because private e-mail exists already. This is a "sender be ware" issue, not "you received it so it's your fault' issue. You seem to have it backwards IMO.


    Still, this is an issue, and it doesn't seem the Gov has this worked out yet. Who is checking this stuff? Can just anyone open a private e-mail account and do gov work without anyone noticing? That is a major problem and needs to be fixed.. and it is a crying shame that it hasn't.


    --------
    @cowboy
    I have no idea what your talking about.
    To serve man.

  20. #14
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,203
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post


    --------
    @cowboy
    I have no idea what your talking about.
    Sure you do. At the beginning of the investigation it wasn't known about the classified stuff, yet it was championed by your side how illegal it was. Go look at the threads, I don't have to. I know what's there.

    Such hypocrisy.

    ---------- Post added at 05:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:20 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Not really, I am holding both to the same standard.
    So let's lock Ivanka up?

    ---------- Post added at 05:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:21 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Still, this is an issue, and it doesn't seem the Gov has this worked out yet. Who is checking this stuff? Can just anyone open a private e-mail account and do gov work without anyone noticing? That is a major problem and needs to be fixed.. and it is a crying shame that it hasn't.
    Again, check the threads, it was worked out. All types of new protocols were put in place.

    ---------- Post added at 05:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:23 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post

    Why? I only care about security in areas that require security. I could care less if the janitor uses a secure e-mail. I care greatly if the president, and people doing top secret stuff use secure e-mail.
    This "principle" you are appealing doesn't make any sense except in its relation to sensitive information. .. which not everyone in gov is involved in.
    Again, again, you're wrong. I believe it was Squatch that rake me over the coals on this one.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  21. #15
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Not really, I am holding both to the same standard.
    Right, they both apparently violated federal records laws, which apply regardless of the content that was transmitted.

    Again, the main point is the incredible stupidity and gross hypocrisy of her using unsecured email after 2 years of Trump promising to lock Hillary up. It's clear now why he didn't follow through on that.

  22. #16
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,772
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy
    Right, they both apparently violated federal records laws, which apply regardless of the content that was transmitted.
    I am not clear on if it is law they broke, or protocol. In that, what Hillary did was called incredibly stupid, ignorant.. etc etc. But it wasn't "illegal". She violated protocols, not law.
    For hillary where she is claimed to have broken the law was in regard to top secret info. Which doesn't seem to be at play here. Gov officials have a duty to "preserve" the documents, so as long as she did that.. I doubt she is in violation of any "law".

    Now, I am really not sure in what has changed since Hillary as far as the law goes. So I assume it is still a protocol thing. And it is clearly a problem that is concerning that gov officials still don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by FUTURE
    Again, the main point is the incredible stupidity and gross hypocrisy of her using unsecured email after 2 years of Trump promising to lock Hillary up. It's clear now why he didn't follow through on that.
    Boy you ain't kidding. I can't believe anyone in the gov, much less a Trump would even think of doing anything remotely gov related on a private anything.

    I don't think it is just Her though, it is still a system that allowed it. Like why did anyone send her e-mails? Did they not know it was a private e-mail? Were any red flags put up?
    I mean, this sort of thing shouldn't' last for weeks, the system should police it and force the corrections. That is what concerns me more.


    My concern is this. In the end I want the gov run by people who are not professional politicians. I want a plumber as the president (not the issue.. don't get distracted). Which means that there needs to be a system in place to help them stay secure in their communications. Because if the system can't catch and correct people who are doing it on accident.. what is the chances it will catch actual criminals/spies etc? it is just a concern, and should be a concern for everyone I think.
    To serve man.

  23. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    For hillary where she is claimed to have broken the law was in regard to top secret info.
    No. Hillary was under fire for apparently violating at least 4 laws/areas of the law:
    FOIA
    Federal Records Act
    Section 1924 of Title 18
    NARA regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Which doesn't seem to be at play here.
    At least two of the above possibly apply here, including also the Presidential Records Act.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Now, I am really not sure in what has changed since Hillary as far as the law goes.
    Minor changes, but nothing noteworthy. The biggest change is the weight put on such issues publicly as a result of Trump's campaigning against Hillary. His own mistake, really.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I don't think it is just Her though, it is still a system that allowed it. Like why did anyone send her e-mails? Did they not know it was a private e-mail? Were any red flags put up?
    In some cases her personal email was the only one folks had for her, so in order to contact her for official business they had to use it.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I mean, this sort of thing shouldn't' last for weeks, the system should police it and force the corrections. That is what concerns me more.
    The entitled will get away with whatever they can as long as they can. Trump's use of unsecured phones is a prime example.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    My concern is this. In the end I want the gov run by people who are not professional politicians. I want a plumber as the president (not the issue.. don't get distracted).
    I want no politicians running the gov. In this day and age of ultra-real-time connectivity, there is absolutely no reason to keep relying on representative democracy.

  24. #18
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,772
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    @ future, but those laws were an issue for Hillary because of distraction not for simple use.. right?
    The use part was simy a violation if the protocals that were in place.. at least that is how I understood it.

    As for the only e-mailed an way to contact. That hardly seems an excuse. Like there is no one in the gov that can call her and say, you have not activated your gov account. Let me hold your hand through the process and explain why this is important and the laws and duties that apply to you in your gov position. Can't a link to some gov agent be sent a link saying " what up dog, she ain't got no gov email? How's I supposed to send these nuke codes to the janitor on some private email.. fix dis chit yo. "

    As to no representatives.. I am not ready for a Facebook government. I really want someone to hang when they bimp into the launch nukes button .

    ---------- Post added at 02:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:40 PM ----------

    @ future, but those laws were an issue for Hillary because of distraction not for simple use.. right?
    The use part was simy a violation if the protocals that were in place.. at least that is how I understood it.

    As for the only e-mailed an way to contact. That hardly seems an excuse. Like there is no one in the gov that can call her and say, you have not activated your gov account. Let me hold your hand through the process and explain why this is important and the laws and duties that apply to you in your gov position. Can't a link to some gov agent be sent a link saying " what up dog, she ain't got no gov email? How's I supposed to send these nuke codes to the janitor on some private email.. fix dis chit yo. "

    As to no representatives.. I am not ready for a Facebook government. I really want someone to hang when they bimp into the launch nukes button .
    To serve man.

  25. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    As for the only e-mailed an way to contact. That hardly seems an excuse. Like there is no one in the gov that can call her and say, you have not activated your gov account. Let me hold your hand through the process and explain why this is important and the laws and duties that apply to you in your gov position. Can't a link to some gov agent be sent a link saying " what up dog, she ain't got no gov email? How's I supposed to send these nuke codes to the janitor on some private email.. fix dis chit yo. "
    I'm not saying it's an excuse, merely pointing out that her misuse of unsecured email resulted in such a situation. To your point about someone talking to her in the fashion of "I'll hold your hand and explain why it's important", I would simply point out that the Trumps' attitude of entitlement and the general atmosphere within the administration would likely decrease the probability that someone would be willing to speak to her in that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    As to no representatives.. I am not ready for a Facebook government. I really want someone to hang when they bimp into the launch nukes button.
    It wouldn't be a facebook government, it would the the people. Everyone would make their own decision and vote. There wouldn't be a button for nukes, but an actual consensus agreement by the people on whether nuclear weapons should be used and when.

  26. #20
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,772
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Silence on the Right

    Quote Originally Posted by FUTURE
    I'm not saying it's an excuse, merely pointing out that her misuse of unsecured email resulted in such a situation. To your point about someone talking to her in the fashion of "I'll hold your hand and explain why it's important", I would simply point out that the Trumps' attitude of entitlement and the general atmosphere within the administration would likely decrease the probability that someone would be willing to speak to her in that way.
    I don't think that is how it would work. I mean, that isn't how it works with regulations and laws, where we are a nation of laws and not of favoritism.
    Especially in regards to a security risk issue. you don't get to take a gun into the white house just because your Charlton Heston, I don't care how surprised people are to see a dead guy with a gun trying to get into the white house.

    Quote Originally Posted by FUTURE
    It wouldn't be a facebook government, it would the the people. Everyone would make their own decision and vote. There wouldn't be a button for nukes, but an actual consensus agreement by the people on whether nuclear weapons should be used and when.
    I would caution against such a thing. For the same reason the founders created a republic and not a strait democracy.
    To serve man.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. God's Silence
    By Devout Skeptic in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 239
    Last Post: October 6th, 2012, 12:30 PM
  2. Does Christian Silence Mean Christian Defeat?
    By sonofnietzsche in forum ODN Debates Discussion
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: June 2nd, 2010, 06:25 PM
  3. Break the Silence
    By Blackturtle in forum General Debate
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: September 18th, 2008, 08:59 PM
  4. And they dance in silence,
    By Magpie in forum Writing Club
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 21st, 2008, 04:10 AM
  5. Silence
    By sylouette in forum Writing Club
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 5th, 2006, 09:35 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •