It may not matter in the idea that Jr had not ‘withheld info on a clearance form’ - but he still has to answer on the rest of the exchange.
So you’re saying: colluding with representatives of foreign governments isn’t a problem for retaining security clearance, so long as you disclose the meeting? Huh. I would have thought the demonstrated lack of judgment would be the bigger problem.
I’m not sure. 52 USC § 30116 does not contain the “thing of value” clause; so far as I can see, it just regulates cash contributions.
If I’m a brilliant person who bills my time at $1000 per hour, and if I go to work on a volunteer basis to elect Pauline Pureheart to the US Senate, it seems clear I don’t have to stop working after three hours.
Is there some other statutory authority for your question besides § 30116 ? Am I misreading § 30116 ?
Answer for the violation of what law? How does his exchange violate the law?
Even more so -
forgetting 1 meeting ot of alot of similar meetings - not a big deal - those things happen especially to those that work in a global environment.
Leaving the entire section blank (or marking it N/A as required by the form) and then only disclosing information once called on it ? Thats a huge red flag.
If he’s pardoning anyone we are way past the point when “looking guilty” is the issue.
not for me to say - nor am I intending to suggest ‘strongly’ that it did violiate the law - but it clearly raises questions that must be answered wrt to the entire ‘russians meddling investigation’ and what (if any) knowledge and coordination that the trump team had with it.
A huge red flag for someone without a clearance?
You are aware that the person under discussion is Donald Trump Jr., not Kushner, correct?
Kushner has clearance.
A huge red flag during the clearance process itself. (this is now about Kushner and not Trump Jr. specifically - and is even more generically abot the clearance process).
Got it. Well, I’m certainly prepared to agree that Kushner’s in red flag territory for failure to disclose. Don Jr, with no clearance, seems a different story.
I am quite comfortable defending the distinction between “legal” and “illegal” even for the President’s son.
Regards,
Shodan
Adding your comment earlier about information being a thing of value, it certainly seems like Junior could be in violation of section B, which says
I admit to not being an attorney (but bear in mind that I did apply to law school. Twice), so there may be nuances and interpretations and distinctions I’m unaware of, but a layman read of that link seems like it applies, but I may be wrong.
He did disclose according to an earlier post, although a day later. Presuming that is accurate, depending on the instructions given it could be a big no-no (“disclose everything all at once”) or may be acceptable (“keep on giving us the information as soon as you make a detailed and accurate description of each head”) or in between (“disclose everything everything at once”, but do make corrections with explanations").
You would agree that what has been released thus far is hardly conclusive?
There is no doubt that Kushner was caught red-handed with serious deficiencies in his forms, which he corrected only after being called out.
Plus that lawyer’s statements about Kushner amending his form to say in essence “I’ve had a lot of foreign meetings, ask me about them and I’ll give you more information” is a laughable response to the issues raised. Literally nobody but the President’s family could get away with such nonsense.
Well for you maybe. And me. However, for someone like Kushner, who was heavily involved in his professional capacity in meeting lots of people, including many foreigners, it would stand to reason that he would not be able to recall all of them off the cuff, or even without doing some digging. And still be unable to remember everything.
Of course the flip side you can use a fact like that and try to explain away all sorts of things.
He might as well have put “I will tell you about each individual meeting only after it is leaked to the press.”
which will come down to how he initially answered it on the form itself “details coming seperately” is very different than “N/A” - remember, the form itself specifies that all questions must be answered and nothing left blank. If someone else filled out the form and he signed it - he’s still on the hook for the answers given.