I can hear the “lock her up” chants now at the Trump rallies.
Rick Santorum was already on CNN defending Ivanka because she wasn’t secretary of state and just the president’s daughter. It’s always so convenient when the nepotism becomes a defense; when she gets caught doing stuff, she’s the daughter, but otherwise she is a highly qualified something or other.
I think you will find that Republicans don’t give a shit about this.
I’m waiting for a Republican commentator to come forward with a defense that just makes everything sound even worse: “Look, Hillary Clinton knew what she was doing because she’s had a long record of public service, and she just isn’t an incompetent person. Ivanka is just the daughter of the Preisdent who had a blonde moment - whoopsie! We can’t hold Ivanka to the same standard as Hillary, since Ivanka still has problems with naming the four branches of government. That’s why these two things are completely different!”
And then the Trumpists will hoot and holler about how true that all is.
To be fair, I think the current republican talking points are:
- No evidence any classified/sensitive materials were discussed
- No evidence the private email was set up to deliberately skirt the FOIA
- No evidence that private emails were deleted/destroyed
Personally, I think it’s bad optics, but not much more until one of the above three is proven.
has she been pardoned yet?
I agree, but those are some pretty bad optics. Frames nicely the portrait of Ivanka as hypocritical, entitled, and unqualified.
And here I thought she was Assistant to the President with a job title and a security clearance and all that stuff. Nope, she’s just Trump’s little daughter and who could expect a silly-willy girl to know the law?
Shouldn’t there be an immediate Congressional investigation to answer these questions?
You have to frickin’ love that this happens just as the House announces subpoenas for Comey and Lynch regarding Clinton’s emails.
Well, don’t forget that Ivanka did this*** after*** 3 years of people (especially her father) making quite a big deal about private email servers. It’s one thing for Clinton to do what Powell and Rice did, in the absence of a public outcry. Quite another for Ivanka to do something similar in today’s climate.
LOCK HER Up!! LOCK HER UP!!
Well…as far as I know, she doesn’t have a security clearance, does she? That means she hasn’t had the same security briefings that Clinton would have. She also SHOULDN’T have access to classified material (if she does, then whoever gave it to her would be the one on the hook for fucking up). So, not really seeing the parallel. And I’m not defending Trump here, I’m really not seeing even the irony here or the dual standard or whatever it is you are getting at.
Nevermind…I guess she DOES have a TS security clearance. :smack: https://www.axios.com/ivanka-trump-security-clearance-status-jared-kushner-f0ff4333-3665-4778-9c35-ba10bae55d94.html So, disregard…LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP!!
There were fewer emails than Clinton and of less significance than there was, so I will tend to agree that this is even less of a deal than Clinton’s emails which itself wasn’t a big deal.
More of a deal is that given the last couple of years, Ivanka’s claim that she just didn’t know that this was a bad thing indicates that either:
- She is lying.
- She feels so entitled that she assumes that the rules that apply to other people don’t apply to her.
- she is so clueless that she somehow didn’t pick-up on even the broad details of a controversy that was the main pillar of her father’s campaign.
None of these are the sort of thing you want in senior white house staff.
Huh, that’s pretty much word for word the sort of “defense” I’ve been getting from Hillary’s pantsuit fetishists for quite some time now.
And to all those people who were snooting about how it didn’t matter when HRC did it because reasons I reiterate my objection, that if you allow this sort of shit to happen and don’t come down on it like a ton of bricks you’re going to be dealing with ever more flagrant abuses and evasions and security breaches for decades to come. See, partisan defenders, I FUCKING TOLD YOU SO. flips energetic double birds
I mean, seriously, make up your fucking minds–either you have classified material that must remain under security no matter what or everything’s out there and fair game. You really can’t have it both ways.
The irony is that she claimed she didn’t know it was wrong. Where was she during all of Trump’s rallies that she attended? Did she have a brain seizure during all the “Lock her up” chants? Does she have early Alzheimer’s? Or is this just a test for the new Acting Attorney General?
Yeah, I’m firmly in the camp of #3 being the most reasonable explanation. This is really into the “Michael Scott in the warehouse” level of incompetency.
She has exactly the same entitlement feelings that Clinton did…as many appointed high level officials do. Clinton and, certainly her team would have known just as well that private servers could be hacked. Not like this was anything new or even unusual even 5 years ago, let alone in 2016. Overseas and often hostile (or not) state agencies have been doing this for a long time. But they chose to over ride their security people because it was expedient to do so. I’ve seen state officials who try and do the same sorts of thing when they find out that official email is archived for up to 3 years and is subject to FOIA requests and that they can’t simply delete incriminating emails at will. Deleting it from your inbox doesn’t make it magically go away. Unless, of course, you use your own private email server or service.
The difference being that no evidence of the above was produced in Hillary’s case even with the aid of a series of rather exhaustive investigations.
Let’s have the investigations. And if at the end of it, the same can be said for Ivanka, then she’s off the hook AFAIAC.
But Trumpists should still demand that she be imprisoned, even if that turns out to be the case, because that was their response to Hillary.