picardfacepalm.jpg
Yup. I saw that story. While it truly is a facepalm... The language of the articles in Ars and WaPo seems to reek of sensationalism, without saying much else.
According to TheWashington Post, Ivanka Trump sent "fewer than 100 emails in which Trump used her personal account to discuss official business with other administration officials."
Ok. There clearly should be zero of those. However, I feel compelled to point out that zero is a number fewer than 100. Does fewer than 100 mean around 85 and semi-routine use when convenient, or 2 that she accidentally grabbed the wrong auto-complete address?
She also sent "hundreds of messages related to her official work schedule and travel details that she sent [to] herself and personal assistants who cared for her children and house"—emails that could also be subject to federal records laws.
IS that subject to federal records laws? Now that is an interesting question. They COULD be. It greatly depends on the content.
"Please take care of the XYZ, because I am busy all next week." would likely not be subject to federal records laws, as I understand them.
But
"Please take care of the XYZ, because I will be in Russia all next week." may well be subject to federal records laws.
"Please make sure the limo driver picks me up from JFK at 10am." Subject to record laws.
"Please make sure the limo driver picks me up as written on the calendar." not subject to record laws.
But, then, more bizarre, that calendar would likely be an even bigger record laws problem, as information classification grows in aggregate. "The location of any single ship is sensitive but unclassified. The locations of the entire fleet is top secret."
And what bugged me more about Hillary's email debacle wasn't that she did it. But that she would never admit she did anything wrong, when clearly if anyone in a lesser position had done it, they would have been removed from office and clearance revoked, at a minimum. It'll be more telling to see the Trump family reaction.