Exclusive: Ivanka Trump defends use of private email, brushes aside Mueller probe

[Cardinal]

Ivanka Trump, the eldest daughter and a senior adviser to President Donald Trump, defended her use of a private email account while transitioning to an administration job, insisting to ABC News in an exclusive interview on Tuesday "there's no connection between" her situation and Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

Speaking with ABC News' Deborah Roberts in Wilder, Idaho, where she's promoting STEM initiatives alongside Apple CEO Tim Cook, Ivanka Trump maintained that all of the emails on her private account were properly archived and contained no classified information. She is adamant they bear no resemblance to Hillary Clinton's email scandal, which her father eagerly and frequently condemned as part of his campaign for president.

"All of my emails are stored and preserved. There were no deletions. There is no attempt to hide," she said, adding, "There's no equivalency to what my father's spoken
about."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive...ivate-email-brushes-mueller/story?id=59455437

Thus far, the belief that Ivanka preserved all of her emails per Federal record keeping laws and transmitted no classified data appears to come from Ivanka herself, so there's zero reason to assume that she followed the law at all.

And since Republicans won't be able to address this issue without making it about Hillary Clinton, it's clear that only a Democratic-controlled House investigation is qualified to investigate Ivanka's use of private email accounts, along with everybody else in the Trump Administration who has done so. Every Republican/Conservative in this thread will make the issue about Clinton, thus proving my point that Republicans are unqualified to address the issue.

 

[Obscurity]

Lock her up.

 

[Athanasius68]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive...ivate-email-brushes-mueller/story?id=59455437

Thus far, the belief that Ivanka preserved all of her emails per Federal record keeping laws and transmitted no classified data appears to come from Ivanka herself, so there's zero reason to assume that she followed the law at all.

And since Republicans won't be able to address this issue without making it about Hillary Clinton, it's clear that only a Democratic-controlled House investigation is qualified to investigate Ivanka's use of private email accounts, along with everybody else in the Trump Administration who has done so. Every Republican/Conservative in this thread will make the issue about Clinton, thus proving my point that Republicans are unqualified to address the issue.

No. As always, the issue is equal justice under the law.

 

[Captain America]

Lock her up.

View attachment 67245073

 

[apdst]

Lock her up.

What law did she break?

 

[Cardinal]

What law did she break?

At issue is that by using a private email account it's difficult (though I doubt impossible) to very that she followed Federal record keeping laws, and it's difficult (thought I doubt impossible) to verify that she didn't transmit classified data. That is why a thorough House investigation controlled by Democrats is needed.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive...ivate-email-brushes-mueller/story?id=59455437

Thus far, the belief that Ivanka preserved all of her emails per Federal record keeping laws and transmitted no classified data appears to come from Ivanka herself, so there's zero reason to assume that she followed the law at all.

And since Republicans won't be able to address this issue without making it about Hillary Clinton, it's clear that only a Democratic-controlled House investigation is qualified to investigate Ivanka's use of private email accounts, along with everybody else in the Trump Administration who has done so. Every Republican/Conservative in this thread will make the issue about Clinton, thus proving my point that Republicans are unqualified to address the issue.

I think she needs to delete all the evidence which is the proper procedure for this type of situation.

 

[apdst]

At issue is that by using a private email account it's difficult (though I doubt impossible) to very that she followed Federal record keeping laws, and it's difficult (thought I doubt impossible) to verify that she didn't transmit classified data. That is why a thorough House investigation (one controlled by Democrats) is needed.

If all her emails were stored in the government server, nothing was deleted and no classified material was trannsmitted, then there's no crime.

If the emails were properly stored (which is what is claimed) then it'll be a very short investigation; one that's already occuring, no doubt.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

At issue is that by using a private email account it's difficult (though I doubt impossible) to very that she followed Federal record keeping laws, and it's difficult (thought I doubt impossible) to verify that she didn't transmit classified data. That is why a thorough House investigation controlled by Democrats is needed.

Is there evidence that classified information was sent over the server or is this another fishing trip with the hope of uncovering something. If there is no evidence let the witch hunt begin.

 

[Cardinal]

If all her emails were stored in the government server, nothing was deleted and no classified material was trannsmitted, then there's no crime.

If the emails were properly stored (which is what is claimed) then it'll be a very short investigation; one that's already occuring, no doubt.

A thorough investigation is required to verify that all her email were, in fact, actually stored in a proper government service. Thus far the only reason we have to think that they were comes from Ivanka herself, who of course has zero credibility.

Is there evidence that classified information was sent over the server or is this another fishing trip with the hope of uncovering something. If there is no evidence let the witch hunt begin.

Ergo why a thorough investigation is required.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

What law did she break?

You might start with "The Presidential Records Act" (Wikipedia is a good place to START learning about the situation).

If Ms. Trump DID NOT breach that act, then (most likely) Ms. Clinton didn't either.

If Ms. Trump DID breach that act, then whether Ms. Clinton did as well still has to be determined.

Whether the Republican leadership honestly believes that Ms. Clinton breached that act, is indicated by the number of investigations which the Republican majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate have initiated into Ms. Clinton's conduct.

[HINT - The MORE investigations, the MORE likely it is that the Republicans honestly believe in their accusations and the FEWER investigations, the LESS likely it is that the Republicans honestly believe in their accusations. So far the Republican majorities in the House and Senate have initiated ZERO investigations. From the fact that the Republican majorities have initiated ZERO investigations, it is possible to deduce that there is (likely to be) ZERO likelihood that the Republicans honestly believe in their accusations.]

 

[1751Texan]

Ignorance is a defense.


"there's no connection between" her situation and Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

 

[apdst]

A thorough investigation is required to verify that all her email were, in fact, actually stored in a proper government service. Thus far the only reason we have to think that they were comes from Ivanka herself, who of course has zero credibility.



Ergo why a thorough investigation is required.

Oh yeah, I agree. The precedence needs to be set so when Republicans re-take Congress, they can use it to burn Democrats.

 

[apdst]

You might start with "The Presidential Records Act" (Wikipedia is a good place to START learning about the situation).

If Ms. Trump DID NOT breach that act, then (most likely) Ms. Clinton didn't either.

If Ms. Trump DID breach that act, then whether Ms. Clinton did as well still has to be determined.

Whether the Republican leadership honestly believes that Ms. Clinton breached that act, is indicated by the number of investigations which the Republican majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate have initiated into Ms. Clinton's conduct.

[HINT - The MORE investigations, the MORE likely it is that the Republicans honestly believe in their accusations and the FEWER investigations, the LESS likely it is that the Republicans honestly believe in their accusations. So far the Republican majorities in the House and Senate have initiated ZERO investigations. From the fact that the Republican majorities have initiated ZERO investigations, it is possible to deduce that there is (likely to be) ZERO likelihood that the Republicans honestly believe in their accusations.]

Apples and oranges: Clinton set up a private server specifically intended to circumvent the law.

Ivanka, didn't.

Big difference.

 

[MovingPictures]

What law did she break?

You always ask this like a parrot in every thread.

 

[justabubba]

Is there evidence that classified information was sent over the server or is this another fishing trip with the hope of uncovering something. If there is no evidence let the witch hunt begin.

let's look and see

 

[MovingPictures]

Apples and oranges: Clinton set up a private server specifically intended to circumvent the law.

Ivanka, didn't.

Big difference.

And you know how that server was found? An investigation of why she had a private email account in the first place.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, the Democrats should investigate Ivanka, and see if she's been using the WH to conduct private business.

 

[Cardinal]

Proof of concept:

Every Republican/Conservative in this thread will make the issue about Clinton, thus proving my point that Republicans are unqualified to address the issue.

Apples and oranges: Clinton set up a private server specifically intended to circumvent the law.

 

[justabubba]

Apples and oranges: Clinton set up a private server specifically intended to circumvent the law.

Ivanka, didn't.

Big difference.

how do we know this
it would appear from accounts that she used a private family server rather than the government's when conducting the government's business
if my recollection is accurate, hillary did the same

 

[apdst]

You always ask this like a parrot in every thread.

And you fail to be able to answer, in every thread. Why is that?

 

[JustHanging]

Apples and oranges:

Exactly! Ivanka's last name starts with a "T", Hillary's last name starts with a "C".

I bet they have different hair styles as well. Sheesh, and people are going to try to compare them. SMH.


And don't forget eye colour, they might have different eye colour, making the two cases completely different.

 

[apdst]

And you know how that server was found? An investigation of why she had a private email account in the first place.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, the Democrats should investigate Ivanka, and see if she's been using the WH to conduct private business.

When Ivanka's private server is discovered...let us know.

 

[Obscurity]

What law did she break?

Did any of you give a damn before?

Lock her up!

 

[Praxas]

Apples and oranges: Clinton set up a private server specifically intended to circumvent the law.

Ivanka, didn't.

Big difference.

Prove she did it to circumvent the law. You have no evidence her intention was to do that. Dishonest comments from you as usual.

 

[Cardinal]

When Ivanka's private server is discovered...let us know.

If that was relevant that would be a good point.