ADVERTISEMENT

Newsweek: Trump White House senior staff using private RNC e-mail server

Fro

Hall of Famer
Sep 2, 2001
14,388
2,102
113
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-emails-rnc-reince-priebus-white-house-server-548191

Lock them up? Or do we not care about e-mails again? This is the same one where the Bush admin "lost" 22 million e-mails.

Newsweek said:
Senior Trump administration staffers including Kellyanne Conway, Jared Kushner, Sean Spicer and Steve Bannon have active accounts on a Republican National Committee email system, Newsweek has learned.

The system (rnchq.org) is the same one the Bush administration was accused of using to evade transparency rules after claiming to have “lost” 22 million emails.
Making use of separate political email accounts at the White House is not illegal. In fact, they serve a purpose by allowing staff to divide political conversations (say, arranging for the president to support a congressional re-election campaign) from actual White House work. Commingling politics and state business violates the Hatch Act, which restricts many executive branch employees from engaging in political activity on government time.

But after then-candidate Donald Trump and the Republicans repeatedly called for “locking up” Hillary Clinton for handling government work with a private server while secretary of state, the new White House staff risks repeating the same mistake that dogged the Democrat’s presidential campaign. They also face a security challenge: The RNC email system, according to U.S. intelligence, was hacked during the 2016 race. “They better be careful after making such a huge ruckus over the private email over at the State Department,” says former Bush administration lawyer Richard Painter.

It’s not clear whether or how Trump staffers are using the RNC email addresses. If they are using them, they are subject to the “Disclosure Requirement For Official Business Conducted Using Electronic Messaging Accounts," a law, 44 U.S.C. 2209, that went into effect in 2014. If White House staffers have already used the RNC emails system for White House work, they must copy or forward those communications into the government system within 20 days.

The Disclosure Requirement was passed to prevent presidents from shielding communications that fall under the Presidential Records Act of 1978. The last time White House staffers used the same RNC email system, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) described it as an attempt to circumvent transparency. CREW Director Melanie Sloan charged in 2007 that the Bush White House was using the RNC email system because “they don’t want anyone ever to be able to come back and see what was going on behind the scenes.”

...

Besides the unfortunate P.R. optics of Trump using a nonofficial email server in his White House after a campaign built on attacking a similar practice, there are other, more serious problems. First, obviously, is cybersecurity. Russian hackers didn’t harvest as much material from the RNC system as from the Democrats’, but the system was still hackable. Second is transparency. Trump and other Republicans throughout the 2016 campaign voiced concerns about the transparency of Clinton’s use of a “home-brew” personal email server in her basement. FBI Director James Comey called her email practices “extremely reckless,” and the investigation and lingering taint of suspicion arguably cost her the election.

The chief effect of using the RNC server in the Bush years was to leave investigators who wanted to know more about the origins of the Iraq War in the dark—for years. It remains impossible to determine whether Bush staffers ever sent classified material over the RNC system.
 
The article says they have 16 days to transfer any email correspondence dealing with official White House business to an official WH account. With that said, these people have to be the most tone deaf around. Even if they have every intention of complying with the law, the optics on this are horrible.

It's in the ball park of lobbying to keep Obamacare, calling it Obamacare and declaring it's the best healthcare plan ever.
 
Does the SOS not have higher levels of clearance and more timely information?
That's completely irrelevant. The issue has to do with hiding from FOIAs and abiding by legislation. There are plenty of people using that RNC system that would have access to top tier intelligence just as would SoS. If they decide to start having private conversations on that server vs the WHouse secure servers you get the same problems for which HRC's office was accused.

The only difference between this and what HrC did was the location of the server.
 
You believe that most government employees use a "private" server for their unofficial email?

Yes.* But smart phone texting has changed that somewhat. While I never looked into it, I think there are rules prohibiting some highly placed government employees from using a cell phone while at work (another regulation HRC routinely ignored). So alt-mail is the only way to have non-work communications while at work.

This was true in the organizations I worked for. While there was some leniency about about using the public system for personal business, all employees were made clearly aware that there was no confidentiality with that.
 
Yes.* But smart phone texting has changed that somewhat. While I never looked into it, I think there are rules prohibiting some highly placed government employees from using a cell phone while at work (another regulation HRC routinely ignored). So alt-mail is the only way to have non-work communications while at work.

This was true in the organizations I worked for. While there was some leniency about about using the public system for personal business, all employees were made clearly aware that there was no confidentiality with that.
That's not what you previously said. You said there is a private server for them to use for unofficial email. This is not true.

What you're saying now is that some of them have a gmail or yahoo account that they use for unofficial work / personal use. This is true.
 
That's not what you previously said. You said there is a private server for them to use for unofficial email. This is not true.

What you're saying now is that some of them have a gmail or yahoo account that they use for unofficial work / personal use. This is true.

Sorry about that. I conflated private server with private account. That said, isn't an internet email account using a private server? It is a different server than the public one. I don't think we are arguing about a material difference.
 
Sorry about that. I conflated private server with private account. That said, isn't an internet email account using a private server? It is a different server than the public one. I don't think we are arguing about a material difference.
Yes a gmail server is private and no business should be conducted on it for government emps. The issue with an RNC server is that the line is waaaaay too blurred between what's RNC business and what's White House business. It's completely ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mjvcaj
Yes a gmail server is private and no business should be conducted on it for government emps. The issue with an RNC server is that the line is waaaaay too blurred between what's RNC business and what's White House business. It's completely ridiculous.

Confusion might be, but it is a different question.

FWIW, my former employer uses GMAiL for all its government business, but it is a special set-up and I have no idea how the technology works. @gmail.com is not part of the address so outside people don't know. I have two separate addresses that reach me on that account. Saves them big bucks as opposed to buying and maintaining in-house hardware.
 
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-emails-rnc-reince-priebus-white-house-server-548191

Lock them up? Or do we not care about e-mails again? This is the same one where the Bush admin "lost" 22 million e-mails.

Have we found out what was in those deleted RNC emails yet? Private servers and deleted emails are an important issue to republicans so I thought this should come back to the top.

What were they hiding? Why are they trying to get around FOIA? What info got out when they were hacked?
 
giphy.gif
 
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-emails-rnc-reince-priebus-white-house-server-548191

Lock them up? Or do we not care about e-mails again? This is the same one where the Bush admin "lost" 22 million e-mails.

Good grief. Heads are STILL exploding all over the place.

I've got some news for you. Likely every public employee has a private email account accessible from the work place. I did, (2 in fact) and many people I know did likewise. If you think this is similar to Hillary's email arrangement, and her ongoing lies about trying to explain, your heads have not only exploded, they have vaporized.
 
There are too many over the last few months! Its beyond being laughable.
We need to get someone to summarise it all. Full-time job!
Before you laugh or not laugh, is what HRC did wrong or not? If you think it wasn't wrong than this definitely isn't, right?

Moreover, they're not remotely comparable. Are the laws, regulations and policies for the Federal government and Indiana identical? How much nationally classified information was involved? Did anyone pass Top Secret - Special Access Program information? The answer to those questions is "no," "none," and "no." These answers alone mean the situations aren't comparable, except to those that never understood the HRC email issue.
 
Last edited:
Good grief. Heads are STILL exploding all over the place.

I've got some news for you. Likely every public employee has a private email account accessible from the work place. I did, (2 in fact) and many people I know did likewise. If you think this is similar to Hillary's email arrangement, and her ongoing lies about trying to explain, your heads have not only exploded, they have vaporized.

It was touch and go for a moment for Mike Pence:

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/...mike-pence-not-stranded-phillipines/85257700/

;)
 
Last edited:
Before you laugh or not laugh, is what HRC did wrong or not? If you think it wasn't wrong than this definitely isn't, right?

Moreover, they're not remotely comparable. Are the laws, regulations and policies for the Federal government and Indiana identical? How much nationally classified information was involved? Did anyone pass Top Secret - Special Access Program information? The answer to those questions is "no," "none," and "none." These answers alone mean the situations aren't comparable, except to those that never understood the HRC email issue.

The issue is the degree of the 'crime' but the fact that these are the same people who were saying that how could anyone be so stupid for doing it to start with? Her incompetence blah blah.
Meanwhile they were doing it themselves. Thats my starting point.

The reason I understand why previous SecState did it was simply because of the technically antiquated system and procedures that they had to adhere to.
Now the very same guys who said that she was being opaque about the answers, are doing the same things.

So much for draining the swamp. You wonder why people are so cynical.

fyi I have never been a Clinton fan -- both of them.
 
The issue is the degree of the 'crime' but the fact that these are the same people who were saying that how could anyone be so stupid for doing it to start with? Her incompetence blah blah.
Meanwhile they were doing it themselves. Thats my starting point.

The reason I understand why previous SecState did it was simply because of the technically antiquated system and procedures that they had to adhere to.
Now the very say guys who said that she was being opaque about the answers are doing the same things.

So much for draining the swamp.

fyi I have never been a Clinton fan -- both of them.
If it's the degree of incompetence, they're still not comparable. That's became the consequences of the incompetence aren't comparable.

We have no reason to believe that the new SecState will do anything like this. If he does, I'll be all about having him resign at the very least.
 
The issue is the degree of the 'crime' but the fact that these are the same people who were saying that how could anyone be so stupid for doing it to start with? Her incompetence blah blah.
Meanwhile they were doing it themselves. Thats my starting point.

The reason I understand why previous SecState did it was simply because of the technically antiquated system and procedures that they had to adhere to.
Now the very same guys who said that she was being opaque about the answers, are doing the same things.

So much for draining the swamp. You wonder why people are so cynical.

fyi I have never been a Clinton fan -- both of them.

I don't think you have any understanding of what Hillary did wrong.
 
I don't think you have any understanding of what Hillary did wrong.

So you tell me my young jedi what she did wrong that has been proven. None of that Benghazi or vincent foster hysteria.

Just the facts that have been proven.
 
Last edited:
So you tell me my youbg jedi what she did wrong that has been proven. None of that Benghazi or vincent foster hysteria.

Just the facts that have been proven.
Hey, the Republican congress had the hearing on her Benghazi thing 99 times! I bet that number is a historical record. She must have done something awfully evil. Did they find out anything? I was out of country and was too busy to pay attention.

Maybe she murdered the embassy staff?
Maybe she started the riot?
Maybe she said Hallelujah when she found out the death of the embassy folks?
Maybe she called Vladimir Putin, asking him to intervene in the coming presidential election that she would be running in?:(
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sglowrider
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT