The Golden Couple (Ivanka and Jared)

[NCLunaLovegoodFan]

On September 27, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Childless said:

Nope.  I have no sympathy for Tiffany or Marla.  First of all, after the crap way they were treated by Trump, the two of them were tripping over themselves to attend the inauguration.  No sense of self worth.  Then, they were all but begging for free hairdos for the stupid thing.  No class whatsoever.  They both lived 3000 miles away from Trump for the last 20+ years.  They could easily have disassociated themselves.  They chose not to based solely on money.  If you're willing to sell yourself out for money, then don't expect others to give you any respect.

I don't want to seem like I'm taking up for them, but I'm willing to bet that It had something to do with Tiffany's desperation to get close with her father. She's 24 and a college graduate; she's seen her older siblings working alongside Daddy and wants that same type of  relationship with him. She's not likely to join the family business so she chose law school at Georgetown (Ivanka's alma mater). 

I have similar feelings toward Marla as I do Monica Lewinsky. I mainly blame the cheating married men that took interest (even though Bill Clinton was a good  president). They were grown women that chose to sleep with married men, though, and I hope they understand that they were taken advantage of and know better. 

Marla seems like a good mother to Tiff, so she has to put up with Trump's BS so Tiff can have her Dad in her life. They've been accustomed to a glamorous lifestyle and like having a lot of money and spending it...much like Melania. The European trips w/ Secret Service and the inauguration are examples of their obliviousness to their privilege (rich, white, Trump name).  At least Marla and Tiff aren't prancing around the world pretending to to give a damn about women's rights.

Ivanka's the truly evil one even more than Junior and Eric. Daddy's Little Princess trying to stiff her only sister out of her share of the inheritance, while posting pics of them as close sisters is so her MO. The boys, at least, never had any type of relationship with Tiff.  

[Howl]

Jared. Private email account.  Oy! 

Exclusive: Kushner didn't disclose personal email account to Senate intel committee

Spoiler

 

Washington (CNN) In his closed interview with the staff of the Senate intelligence committee, White House senior adviser and presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner did not share the existence of his personal email account, which he has used for official business, CNN has learned.

CNN has also learned that the chair and vice chair of the committee were so unhappy that they learned about the existence of his personal email account via news reports that they wrote him a letter via his attorney Thursday instructing him to double-check that he has turned over every relevant document to the committee including those from his "'personal email account' described to the news media, as well as all other email accounts, messaging apps, or similar communications channels you may have used, or that may contain information relevant to our inquiry." 

 

The old I just forgot excuse is getting pretty old with this group. 

[AnywhereButHere]

13 hours ago, Howl said:

Jared. Private email account.  Oy! 

Exclusive: Kushner didn't disclose personal email account to Senate intel committee

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Washington (CNN) In his closed interview with the staff of the Senate intelligence committee, White House senior adviser and presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner did not share the existence of his personal email account, which he has used for official business, CNN has learned.

CNN has also learned that the chair and vice chair of the committee were so unhappy that they learned about the existence of his personal email account via news reports that they wrote him a letter via his attorney Thursday instructing him to double-check that he has turned over every relevant document to the committee including those from his "'personal email account' described to the news media, as well as all other email accounts, messaging apps, or similar communications channels you may have used, or that may contain information relevant to our inquiry." 

 

The old I just forgot excuse is getting pretty old with this group. 

"I forgot". Looks like he's heading for senility - just like daddy-in-law.

[GrumpyGran]

15 hours ago, NCLunaLovegoodFan said:

I don't want to seem like I'm taking up for them, but I'm willing to bet that It had something to do with Tiffany's desperation to get close with her father. She's 24 and a college graduate; she's seen her older siblings working alongside Daddy and wants that same type of  relationship with him. She's not likely to join the family business so she chose law school at Georgetown (Ivanka's alma mater). 

I have similar feelings toward Marla as I do Monica Lewinsky. I mainly blame the cheating married men that took interest (even though Bill Clinton was a good  president). They were grown women that chose to sleep with married men, though, and I hope they understand that they were taken advantage of and know better. 

Marla seems like a good mother to Tiff, so she has to put up with Trump's BS so Tiff can have her Dad in her life. They've been accustomed to a glamorous lifestyle and like having a lot of money and spending it...much like Melania. The European trips w/ Secret Service and the inauguration are examples of their obliviousness to their privilege (rich, white, Trump name).  At least Marla and Tiff aren't prancing around the world pretending to to give a damn about women's rights.

Ivanka's the truly evil one even more than Junior and Eric. Daddy's Little Princess trying to stiff her only sister out of her share of the inheritance, while posting pics of them as close sisters is so her MO. The boys, at least, never had any type of relationship with Tiff.  

I agree with all of this except that Tiff is trying to get in good with Daddy. She's old enough to understand now where she stands and it's not as if she has been embraced by the "family." I think she's very good at walking that line, not denigrating any of them but taking what she can get, using the name to her advantage. But if he died tomorrow, if any of them died tomorrow, she's have to work hard to fake some crocodile tears.

[onekidanddone]

5 hours ago, AnywhereButHere said:

"I forgot". Looks like he's heading for senility - just like daddy-in-law.

I forgot about the Russians.  I forgot if I'm an man or a woman.  I forgot  I had an email account. Gee Jared did you forget where you put your head? I'll tell you. It is so far up your ass daddy in-law's ass you can see out your his teeth.

[GreyhoundFan]

Hey, @onekidanddone, are you Alexandra Petri in disguise? "Full disclosure: I am Jared Kushner. I have no idea what I’m doing."

Spoiler

“[Jared] Kushner has been criticized in the past for initially not disclosing more than 100 contacts with foreign leaders including those from Russia, as well as ownership of a multimillion dollar tech company with links to Goldman Sachs and businessmen Peter Thiel and George Soros. Kushner was also one of three top campaign officials or surrogates who failed to disclose a June 2016 meeting with a woman billed as being with the Russian government and having incriminating information on Hillary Clinton.” —CNN, Sept. 28

Jared here. Sorry about forgetting to tell you about my private email account, senators!

In general, I apologize if, on a form, I forgot to disclose anything about myself, or, indeed, everything about myself. I just have this condition where the second I am presented with a form for making disclosures, I lose all recollection of who I am, what I am doing and the meaning of the word “disclosure.” It sounds like something that a bank should do to a poor family. Boy, I hope I’m not poor! I assume I’m not, based on these cuff links I’m wearing, but I honestly don’t know! The second I was asked to supply information about myself, my condition kicked in.

Have we met before?

I am not trying to be rude. It’s just that apparently I’ve met like a whole BUNCH of Russian officials, and I have zero recollection of any of this. Or, like, any income I’ve received at any time. Or most of my business holdings. Looking at my fine-tailored suit, I assume I must have business holdings. I can’t wait to find out what they are! I hope they don’t involve a complex web of business dealings with hostile nations. That could be awkward.

You know that thing where you can’t remember your password and the hint seems as though it was written by an entirely different person? I have that, but also for the email address itself and for having created the email. Do I have an email address? What’s an email address? No, genuinely, what is an email address?

I’m sorry. I should have mentioned this to Congress earlier, really, but, again, the second I am presented with a form to fill out, my mind goes blank, and so does the form. Who am I? What am I doing here? Am I qualified to be here? Should I be here? Why was I chosen to be a presidential adviser? Do I have any expertise at all in anything? Good questions, all equally difficult to answer.

Oh my God, I’ve been filling the form out with the wrong end of the pencil, haven’t I? Oops.

They tell me that this woman is my wife and that I am a senior adviser to the president. Senior adviser — wow! Good for me.

I would tattoo personal information on my hands for ease and convenience, but tattoos are lower-class and somehow I know that whatever else I may turn out to be, I am not that. I feel as though I own something made of marble, maybe a building. Or a boat, the kind with costly silent consonants in it. I bet I went to Harvard, whatever that is.

Am I male or female? Well, it’s a 50/50 shot here, at least according to this form’s restrictive binary. Boy, I hope I’m male, just based on, like, society. I’ll pick one at random.

Have I been here before? Should I be talking to you? Who am I? Is this all a nightmare? Or, wait, am I a goldfish? Is there anything else I am failing to disclose? Maybe. Who can say? I certainly can’t.

I bet I know a lot about the Middle East, though. Definitely put me in charge of that.

 

[onekidanddone]

33 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Hey, @onekidanddone, are you Alexandra Petri in disguise? "Full disclosure: I am Jared Kushner. I have no idea what I’m doing.

I hadn't read this before I made my post.

Am I a bacon?    Oh I hope I'm bacon, because everybody loves bacon. 

[onekidanddone]

On 9/24/2017 at 7:05 PM, GreyhoundFan said:

Uh-oh: "Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner used a private email account to conduct White House business dozens of times, his lawyer confirms"

Lock him up!  Lock him up!

[GreyhoundFan]

Seriously? They screech and screech about Hillary's emails: "Hundreds of White House emails sent to third Kushner family account"

Spoiler

White House officials have begun examining emails associated with a third and previously unreported email account on Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump’s private domain, according to three people familiar with the matter.

Hundreds of emails have been sent since January from White House addresses to accounts on the Kushner family domain, these people said. Many of those emails went not to Kushner’s or Ivanka Trump’s personal addresses but to an account they both had access to and shared with their personal household staff for family scheduling.

The emails—which include non-public travel documents, internal schedules and some official White House materials—were in many cases sent from Ivanka Trump, her assistant Bridges Lamar and others who work with the couple in the White House. The emails to the third account were largely sent from White House accounts but occasionally came from other private accounts, one of these people said.

The existence of additional accounts on the family domain beyond the two personal accounts used by Kushner and Ivanka Trump and reported earlier raises new questions about the extent of personal email use by the couple during their time as White House aides. Their use of private email accounts for White House business also raises concerns about the security of potentially sensitive government documents which have been forwarded to private accounts.

The family has declined to say what privacy measures have been placed on the domain, but a person familiar with the set-up said some security measures were taken when it was installed.

Many of the emails came from Ivanka Trump’s assistant and included work-related “data,” according to a person familiar with the exchanges. Such messages were sent “daily,” this person added.

“They’ve pretty much been using it since they got here,” this person said.

Kushner set up the new personal domain in December, ijkfamily.com, as he was preparing to accept a senior adviser role in President Donald Trump’s administration. Ivanka Trump joined the administration in March but was given a government-secured email device prior to becoming a government employee.

POLITICO reported in September that Kushner and Ivanka Trump used their personal emails to conduct some government business. Other current or former White House officials have also used personal email accounts or encrypted messaging apps that can be set to automatically delete communications for official matters. The White House is reviewing the use of personal email addresses by administration officials.

A representative for the family said Ivanka Trump has been careful about keeping her personal life separate from her work.
“Her White House assistant did not and does not work on these matters,” the representative said. “Her personal and work obligations, schedule, travel arrangements and contacts were and are coordinated in accordance with this separation, as she was advised to do.”

The representative added that Ivanka Trump’s emails have been preserved on the White House email system. “The extent of this coordination illustrates both full transparency and a desired separation between her work and personal functions,” this person said.

A White House spokesman said staff have been told to comply with the Presidential Records Act and “applicable guidelines for work-related communications.”

“In light of recent congressional inquiries, we have briefed staff on the need to preserve records and are working to ensure compliance,” the spokesman said.

Kushner’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said his client “uses his White House email address to conduct White House business” and that Kushner exchanged fewer than 100 emails with White House colleagues through the personal account. In most cases, those exchanges were initiated by the other party sending a message to Kushner’s private account, Lowell said.

Kushner forwarded such messages to his official White House email account to comply with the Presidential Records Act, which mandates that documents about White House activities be preserved, according to Lowell.

The blurring of lines between personal and professional communications isn’t unique to the Kushners, but the use of personal email accounts creates a security risk, White House officials and experts say.

“Everyone uses private email, no one thinks about security, and that’s why it keeps happening,” said James A. Lewis, senior vice president and director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Even if there’s not any classified information sent, that doesn’t mean the information wasn’t sensitive.”

Kushner’s activities have been put under a microscope during the ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. That probe, run by FBI special prosecutor Robert Mueller, is further reviewing possible obstruction of justice by the president and White House officials since the inauguration.

The revelations about the Kushner family email domain have drawn parallels to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for official business during her tenure as Secretary of State. Clinton’s emails were a major point of contention during the 2016 election. President Trump criticized Clinton’s email habits and frequently called for Clinton’s arrest on the campaign trail, leading crowds at rallies in chants of “lock her up,” and urged the Justice Department to re-open the investigation into her emails.

Clinton called the private email use by White House staffers the “height of hypocrisy” during an interview last week with SiriusXM.

Many details about the ijkfamily.com email domain remain unclear, including what type of security protections are in place.

The accounts would have been more secure if they relied on commercial email providers rather than a private server, some experts say. “If you’re using a commercial email service provider, you’re really reducing the risk,” according to Lewis, because the major tech companies that run platforms like Gmail and Outlook typically have robust security teams. “If you’re doing your own email, it gets to be a lot easier [to hack],” he added.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said last week that White House staff had been told to stick to their government email accounts. “All White House personnel have been instructed to use official email to conduct all government related work,” Sanders said. “They are further instructed that if they receive work-related communication on personal accounts, they should be forwarded to official email accounts.”

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chair Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), and ranking member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland) sent a letter to White House counsel last week requesting more information about the use of private email addresses by White House staff.

“With numerous public revelations of senior executive branch employees deliberately trying to
circumvent these laws by using personal, private, or alias email addresses to conduct official
government business, the Committee has aimed to use its oversight and investigative resources
to prevent and deter misuse of private forms of written communication,” the pair wrote.

Cummings and the previous chair, then-Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), sent a similar letter in March after reports that White House staffers used encrypted or disappearing messaging apps.

Concerns about how the White House should preserve electronic records like emails far pre-date the Trump administration. Some 22 million White House emails stored on private email servers hosted by the Republican National Committee during President George W. Bush’s administration were subsequently deleted, impeding a later investigation into politically motivated firings of U.S. attorneys.

 

[GrumpyGran]

13 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Seriously? They screech and screech about Hillary's emails: "Hundreds of White House emails sent to third Kushner family account"

  Reveal hidden contents

White House officials have begun examining emails associated with a third and previously unreported email account on Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump’s private domain, according to three people familiar with the matter.

Hundreds of emails have been sent since January from White House addresses to accounts on the Kushner family domain, these people said. Many of those emails went not to Kushner’s or Ivanka Trump’s personal addresses but to an account they both had access to and shared with their personal household staff for family scheduling.

The emails—which include non-public travel documents, internal schedules and some official White House materials—were in many cases sent from Ivanka Trump, her assistant Bridges Lamar and others who work with the couple in the White House. The emails to the third account were largely sent from White House accounts but occasionally came from other private accounts, one of these people said.

The existence of additional accounts on the family domain beyond the two personal accounts used by Kushner and Ivanka Trump and reported earlier raises new questions about the extent of personal email use by the couple during their time as White House aides. Their use of private email accounts for White House business also raises concerns about the security of potentially sensitive government documents which have been forwarded to private accounts.

The family has declined to say what privacy measures have been placed on the domain, but a person familiar with the set-up said some security measures were taken when it was installed.

Many of the emails came from Ivanka Trump’s assistant and included work-related “data,” according to a person familiar with the exchanges. Such messages were sent “daily,” this person added.

“They’ve pretty much been using it since they got here,” this person said.

Kushner set up the new personal domain in December, ijkfamily.com, as he was preparing to accept a senior adviser role in President Donald Trump’s administration. Ivanka Trump joined the administration in March but was given a government-secured email device prior to becoming a government employee.

POLITICO reported in September that Kushner and Ivanka Trump used their personal emails to conduct some government business. Other current or former White House officials have also used personal email accounts or encrypted messaging apps that can be set to automatically delete communications for official matters. The White House is reviewing the use of personal email addresses by administration officials.

A representative for the family said Ivanka Trump has been careful about keeping her personal life separate from her work.
“Her White House assistant did not and does not work on these matters,” the representative said. “Her personal and work obligations, schedule, travel arrangements and contacts were and are coordinated in accordance with this separation, as she was advised to do.”

The representative added that Ivanka Trump’s emails have been preserved on the White House email system. “The extent of this coordination illustrates both full transparency and a desired separation between her work and personal functions,” this person said.

A White House spokesman said staff have been told to comply with the Presidential Records Act and “applicable guidelines for work-related communications.”

“In light of recent congressional inquiries, we have briefed staff on the need to preserve records and are working to ensure compliance,” the spokesman said.

Kushner’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said his client “uses his White House email address to conduct White House business” and that Kushner exchanged fewer than 100 emails with White House colleagues through the personal account. In most cases, those exchanges were initiated by the other party sending a message to Kushner’s private account, Lowell said.

Kushner forwarded such messages to his official White House email account to comply with the Presidential Records Act, which mandates that documents about White House activities be preserved, according to Lowell.

The blurring of lines between personal and professional communications isn’t unique to the Kushners, but the use of personal email accounts creates a security risk, White House officials and experts say.

“Everyone uses private email, no one thinks about security, and that’s why it keeps happening,” said James A. Lewis, senior vice president and director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Even if there’s not any classified information sent, that doesn’t mean the information wasn’t sensitive.”

Kushner’s activities have been put under a microscope during the ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. That probe, run by FBI special prosecutor Robert Mueller, is further reviewing possible obstruction of justice by the president and White House officials since the inauguration.

The revelations about the Kushner family email domain have drawn parallels to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for official business during her tenure as Secretary of State. Clinton’s emails were a major point of contention during the 2016 election. President Trump criticized Clinton’s email habits and frequently called for Clinton’s arrest on the campaign trail, leading crowds at rallies in chants of “lock her up,” and urged the Justice Department to re-open the investigation into her emails.

Clinton called the private email use by White House staffers the “height of hypocrisy” during an interview last week with SiriusXM.

Many details about the ijkfamily.com email domain remain unclear, including what type of security protections are in place.

The accounts would have been more secure if they relied on commercial email providers rather than a private server, some experts say. “If you’re using a commercial email service provider, you’re really reducing the risk,” according to Lewis, because the major tech companies that run platforms like Gmail and Outlook typically have robust security teams. “If you’re doing your own email, it gets to be a lot easier [to hack],” he added.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said last week that White House staff had been told to stick to their government email accounts. “All White House personnel have been instructed to use official email to conduct all government related work,” Sanders said. “They are further instructed that if they receive work-related communication on personal accounts, they should be forwarded to official email accounts.”

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chair Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), and ranking member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland) sent a letter to White House counsel last week requesting more information about the use of private email addresses by White House staff.

“With numerous public revelations of senior executive branch employees deliberately trying to
circumvent these laws by using personal, private, or alias email addresses to conduct official
government business, the Committee has aimed to use its oversight and investigative resources
to prevent and deter misuse of private forms of written communication,” the pair wrote.

Cummings and the previous chair, then-Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), sent a similar letter in March after reports that White House staffers used encrypted or disappearing messaging apps.

Concerns about how the White House should preserve electronic records like emails far pre-date the Trump administration. Some 22 million White House emails stored on private email servers hosted by the Republican National Committee during President George W. Bush’s administration were subsequently deleted, impeding a later investigation into politically motivated firings of U.S. attorneys.

 

Oh, FFS, can't they just talk to their nannies, housekeepers, cooks and butler to tell them when they'll be abandoning leaving the children to go on some super-important government trip?

[onekidanddone]

34 minutes ago, GrumpyGran said:

Oh, FFS, can't they just talk to their nannies, housekeepers, cooks and butler to tell them when they'll be abandoning leaving the children to go on some super-important government trip?

Am I going to  have to change my chant to "Lock them up"?

[GreyhoundFan]

From USA Today: "Exclusive: Jared Kushner's personal email re-routed to Trump Organization computers amid public scrutiny"

Spoiler

President Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka Trump re-routed their personal email accounts to computers run by the Trump Organization as public scrutiny intensified over their use of private emails to conduct White House business, internet registration records show.

The move, made just days after Kushner’s use of a personal email account first became public, came shortly after special counsel Robert Mueller asked the White House to turn over records related to his investigation of Russia's interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion with Trump associates. It also more closely intertwines President Trump’s administration with his constellation of private businesses.

Kushner, who is a senior adviser to the president, first faced scrutiny for his private email use on Sept. 24, when his lawyer confirmed that he had occasionally used a personal email account to communicate with other White House officials. Kushner's contacts with Russians during the presidential campaign have drawn the attention of federal investigators. 

According to internet registration records reviewed by USA TODAY and cybersecurity researchers, Kushner and his wife Ivanka Trump, who is also a senior adviser, re-routed their email accounts to a server operated by the Trump Organization on either Sept. 26 or 27, as attention from the media and lawmakers intensified.

The Trump Organization did not respond to questions Tuesday about the email accounts. 

A spokesman for Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not directly involved with the technical details, said in a statement that the couple's personal email "does not reside and never has resided in, nor passed through, through the Trump Organization email server." Instead, the spokesman said Kushner and Trump and used a "filtering service" to block viruses and malware.

Last week, the leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is conducting its own investigation of Russian election interference, told Kushner they were “concerned” that they had heard about the emails in news reports instead of from him. The committee had asked him to turn over copies of emails related to the investigation.

Oh good, reroute the emails. Yeah, that's secure. (end sarcasm) #lockthemup

[Imagine20]

I don't know if this has been discussed, but Don Jr and Ivanka were apparently pretty close to being indicted for fraud in 2012 regarding their SoHo condo sales.

ProPublica Article

[GreyhoundFan]

Another good one from Jennifer Rubin: "Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump must go"

Spoiler

The continued presence of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump in the West Wing constitutes both a legal liability and a political embarrassment for President Trump. The couple have not a single identifiable accomplishment in office between the two of them. Ivanka Trump, however, has been on defense, whining about unfair expectations and trying to wiggle out of responsibility for failing to influence her father. Kushner wound up at odds with the State Department and was there to cheer on disastrous personnel decisions (e.g. hiring Paul Manafort during the campaign, firing former FBI director James B. Comey).

Trump would be wise to send them back home to New York to reside in the Trump empire.

Kushner, you will recall, has a host of potential legal problems stemming from participation in a meeting with Russian officials at Trump Tower during the campaign; a meeting with the head of a sanctioned Russian bank during the transition; encouragement for the president to fire Comey (an action that may be considered obstruction of justice) and failure to disclose all his foreign contacts on his security clearance forms.

Now USA Today reports:

President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka Trump re-routed their personal email accounts to computers run by the Trump Organization as public scrutiny intensified over their use of private emails to conduct White House business, internet registration records show.

The move, made just days after Kushner’s use of a personal email account first became public, came shortly after special counsel Robert Mueller asked the White House to turn over records related to his investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion with Trump associates. It also more closely intertwines President Trump’s administration with his constellation of private businesses.

No one said this crowd was subtle. Nevertheless, Mueller can subpoena the emails and obtain information about rerouting the accounts as part of his ongoing investigation. Now imagine Republicans’ reaction if Hillary Clinton had been caught moving her private email account that had been used improperly for government business over to the Clinton Foundation. I think the chant would be: “Lock her up!”

But wait — there’s more. Politico reports:

The Justice Department has released a series of recently overruled legal memos concluding that presidents cannot appoint their relatives to the White House staff or presidential commissions, even to unpaid posts.

In January, a career Justice Department official essentially declared the earlier opinions erroneous or obsolete, clearing the way for President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to take a senior adviser position in the White House. First daughter Ivanka Trump later took a similar official but unpaid slot under the same legal rationale.

The newly disclosed opinions, issued to the administrations of Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan and obtained by POLITICO Monday through a Freedom of Information Act request, detail how Justice Department lawyers concluded for decades that such appointments of family members were illegal under an anti-nepotism law passed in 1967.

Hmm, maybe that attorney needs to be interviewed to determine whether he was pressured into offering up an opinion that allowed Trump to do what his predecessors did not.

In any event, as Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington noted, we see that once again “the Trump administration fails to meet the ethical and transparency bar of the Nixon administration.” Earlier this year, CREW prophetically warned:

Whether or not this legal analysis holds up, President Trump’s hiring of his son-in-law and daughter undoubtedly violates the intended purpose of the anti-nepotism statute. Originally passed after President Kennedy appointed his brother as attorney general, the statute manifestly aims to prevent the president from appointing family members to government positions. Allowing nepotism — especially at the highest level of government — undermines the integrity of the Administration’s policy making. President Trump’s appointments of his daughter and son-in-law make clear that he is not interested in selecting the most qualified candidates, and also may violate President Trump’s own Ethics Pledge. Neither Mr. Kushner nor Ms. Trump has any significant experience in policymaking. … These appointments also are likely to inhibit the ability of other government employees to give candid opinions about policy proposals and personnel matters for fear of alienating the president’s family members.

Moreover, serving as a presidential advisor to a close family member raises a larger and more serious question about whether Ms. Trump’s and Mr. Kushner’s primary allegiance is to the Constitution or to President Trump personally and his brand. In a monarchy, these interests may be one and the same, but not necessarily in a democracy.

The good news for the administration is that the situation can be remedied — by sending Ivanka Trump and Kushner home, where she need not fret about failing to live up to expectations and he can attend to his financial troubles and marshal his legal defenses. 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Because she's been such a success so far: "Ivanka Trump takes on taxes"

Spoiler

Ivanka Trump wants a win.

More than six months since she formally joined President Donald Trump’s administration in March, the first daughter has yet to make her mark on any of the administration’s major policy decisions. Now she’s staking her reputation in Washington on making sure her father’s tax reform plan includes an expanded child tax credit – a version of a pet issue she championed during the campaign.

So far, Ivanka Trump’s approach has been markedly different than her past efforts in pushing policy, evidence of the way Washington has schooled her in her seven months in the West Wing, according to interviews with more than a dozen people, including White House officials, congressional aides, and conservative leaders and policy experts.

She’s embarked on an extensive outreach program to build support among influential Republicans – and attracted backing from Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Mike Lee of Utah by adopting parts of their proposal they introduced in 2015.

In recent weeks, the first daughter has done private calls and meetings with GOP lawmakers from both the Senate and House, right-leaning tax experts, business groups, think tanks, and social conservatives to build support: everyone from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the Heritage Foundation, Republican Rep. Mark Meadows, and Democratic Rep. John Larson, according to a White House official.

Trump also plans to host two dinners with lawmakers at her home in Kalorama to promote the issue, with one this Wednesday with House members and another on Oct. 16 that includes Rubio and Lee.

“I don’t think anyone would say that she came up with this idea herself,” said one conservative lobbyist. “There is increasing consensus among conservatives in Washington on this issue and significant support among strong voices like Sens. Rubio and Lee. She is viewed as a prominent spokesperson.”

A White House official said that Trump has approached all of the issues in her portfolio such as parental leave and STEM education this way – by listening and building coalitions.

“A significant expansion of the Child Tax Credit will help parents have more money at a time in their lives when they need it the most and give them the flexibility to make the best choices regarding their families’ care,” Trump said in a statement. “We’ve been deeply committed to helping parents afford the costs of raising and caring for their children since the early days of the administration and will continue to advocate for relief for American families in the coming weeks.”

Among some right-leaning policy experts, there’s a sense that Trump opted to champion a version of the child care tax credit that can pass and that adheres to very establishment Republican orthodoxy, despite her father’s disruptive and non-traditional approach to GOP politics.

“Inevitably, there would have been a child tax credit expansion in any Republican tax plan. This is very conventional in a sense, with tax cuts on the high end and expanding the child credit. This could have been what Romney did,” said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute who attended a breakfast where Trump spoke about the issue.

To detractors, Trump’s involvement is another instance of her talking up pro-family and pro-women policies as part of her brand while making little meaningful progress on these questions from her perch inside the White House.

Recently, the Center for American Progress issued a report that gave Trump failing marks for her advocacy of women and family issues, some of which the White House considers part of her portfolio. Just last week, the administration rolled back an Obama-era rule, giving employers much greater leeway on religious or moral grounds to opt out of a mandate that the Affordable Care Act cover birth control.

“If you step back and look at the administration from equal pay to even just analyzing paid leave, this administration is one of the most regressive on women’s issues,” said Neera Tanden, president of the left-leaning think tank. “If she is the leading voice, then she is a voice of policies that hurt women.”

President Bill Clinton first enacted the child tax credit in 1997 to reduce the tax liability of families. President George W. Bush expanded it in 2001 to give families a non-refundable $1,000 a year tax credit for each child under age 17, with the generosity of the credit phasing out for married couples who earn more than $110,000 and single parents who earn more than $75,000.

Originally, Trump had pitched a new tax deduction for families that rely on formal child care arrangements such as day care, an idea pilloried by both the left and the right. Liberals hated it because they said it mostly benefited wealthy families, while the right despised it because conservatives said it gave preference to families that used paid day care and penalized stay-at-home parents, or anyone who relied child care outside of official channels.

Trump tweaked the idea, with the help of White House staffers – including Shahira Knight of the National Economic Council and Kara McKee of the Domestic Policy Council – so that it simply expands the existing child tax credit to increase the amount of credit as well as the eligibility. That’s a much easier lift politically than creating an entirely new credit.

Two top staffers from the legislative affairs office with deep ties to conservatives – Marc Short and Paul Teller – have helped her with the political outreach to conservatives throughout Washington, many of whom championed child tax credits dating back to the Republicans 1994 “Contract with America.”

She also met several times with Rubio, giving her an ally with the conservative base, which at the start of the administration expressed far more skepticism about the so-called “New York” faction of the West Wing.

That still doesn’t mean Trump’s pet idea will survive the politics of a potential overhaul of the tax code – if the White House’s ambitious plan gets through Congress at all. Expanding the child tax credit does not consume lawmakers, or even President Trump, behind-closed-doors in the same way as lowering tax rates does.

How the tax credit ends up being structured remains unclear, with the White House leaving many of those details to the tax writing committees that are trying to produce a bill this fall.

The House Republicans proposed their own version of an expanded child tax credit in their House tax blueprint in 2016 – though it differs in its structure from Rubio’s proposal. The House GOP version makes the credit more generous and the first $1,000 refundable, while the Rubio and Lee version delivers a more generous version of the credit by reducing the amount of payroll taxes families owe.

Making the existing child tax credit more generous costs money at a time when lawmakers are hunting for tax deductions and breaks to eliminate to offset potentially huge rate cuts. Already one of lawmakers’ primary targets – the elimination of the deduction of state and local taxes – has gotten blowback on Capitol Hill.

Groups that support the expansion of the tax credit have welcomed Ivanka Trump’s involvement, saying that it guarantees the White House won’t drop the issue. Even groups that do not view an expanded child tax credit as a major priority, privately say it helps round up more allies for a tax overhaul.

“When the trade-offs start happening, I don’t want the child tax credit watered down so it is just cosmetic,” said Patrick Purtill, Director of Legislative Affairs for the Faith & Freedom Coalition, which strongly supports the idea. “We want this thing to have some teeth. We don’t want just a window-dressing tax credit.”

The idea appears to be gaining momentum. A few House members broached the idea in a recent closed door meeting of the House Republican conference, according to a congressional aide. Ralph Reed, founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Caucus, brought it up during a recent dinner at the White House that President Trump held with social conservatives, according to one attendee.

Ivanka Trump championed the idea at breakfast at the headquarters of Americans for Tax Reform in early September, where Grover Norquist introduced her and she met several conservative activists and leaders.

The Chairman of the Ways & Means Committee Kevin Brady told reporters last week that an expansion was a priority.

“We believe the child tax credit should be bigger. And that more Americans should be able to use it,” Brady said. “And then it ought to be used – or able to be used – for all the needs of raising a child: whether it is for child care, or for special needs, or for saving for college. And so that’s the direction we’re heading.”

Yet the biggest case for expanding the child tax credit may come out of the White House’s own desire to ensure its tax package helps out the middle class. If lawmakers end up slashing both the corporate and individual rates, it will need a way to make any tax package helpful to families, and that is where expanding the child tax credit could emerge in a starring role.

The president himself indicated as much in early September, telling North Dakotans in a tax reform speech that expanding the child tax credit was one central plank for middle-class tax relief.

“This is a major, major tax cut – the biggest since Ronald Reagan,” the president said first to applause. This came after he had called Ivanka Trump to briefly come join him on stage.

A few minutes later, President Trump added: “So we will provide tax relief to middle-income families through a combination of benefits, such as raising their standard deduction, increasing the child tax credit, and lowering tax rates substantially.”

Anyone who believes that the middle and lower income families will benefit from any tax plan put forth by the TT or the Repugs is delusional. They keep talking up raising the standard deduction, but they fail to mention that they want to take away the personal exemption, which will negate the savings from the increased standard deduction. Ivanka couldn't care less about working families.

[GrumpyGran]

7 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Because she's been such a success so far: "Ivanka Trump takes on taxes"

  Reveal hidden contents

Ivanka Trump wants a win.

More than six months since she formally joined President Donald Trump’s administration in March, the first daughter has yet to make her mark on any of the administration’s major policy decisions. Now she’s staking her reputation in Washington on making sure her father’s tax reform plan includes an expanded child tax credit – a version of a pet issue she championed during the campaign.

So far, Ivanka Trump’s approach has been markedly different than her past efforts in pushing policy, evidence of the way Washington has schooled her in her seven months in the West Wing, according to interviews with more than a dozen people, including White House officials, congressional aides, and conservative leaders and policy experts.

She’s embarked on an extensive outreach program to build support among influential Republicans – and attracted backing from Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Mike Lee of Utah by adopting parts of their proposal they introduced in 2015.

In recent weeks, the first daughter has done private calls and meetings with GOP lawmakers from both the Senate and House, right-leaning tax experts, business groups, think tanks, and social conservatives to build support: everyone from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the Heritage Foundation, Republican Rep. Mark Meadows, and Democratic Rep. John Larson, according to a White House official.

Trump also plans to host two dinners with lawmakers at her home in Kalorama to promote the issue, with one this Wednesday with House members and another on Oct. 16 that includes Rubio and Lee.

“I don’t think anyone would say that she came up with this idea herself,” said one conservative lobbyist. “There is increasing consensus among conservatives in Washington on this issue and significant support among strong voices like Sens. Rubio and Lee. She is viewed as a prominent spokesperson.”

A White House official said that Trump has approached all of the issues in her portfolio such as parental leave and STEM education this way – by listening and building coalitions.

“A significant expansion of the Child Tax Credit will help parents have more money at a time in their lives when they need it the most and give them the flexibility to make the best choices regarding their families’ care,” Trump said in a statement. “We’ve been deeply committed to helping parents afford the costs of raising and caring for their children since the early days of the administration and will continue to advocate for relief for American families in the coming weeks.”

Among some right-leaning policy experts, there’s a sense that Trump opted to champion a version of the child care tax credit that can pass and that adheres to very establishment Republican orthodoxy, despite her father’s disruptive and non-traditional approach to GOP politics.

“Inevitably, there would have been a child tax credit expansion in any Republican tax plan. This is very conventional in a sense, with tax cuts on the high end and expanding the child credit. This could have been what Romney did,” said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute who attended a breakfast where Trump spoke about the issue.

To detractors, Trump’s involvement is another instance of her talking up pro-family and pro-women policies as part of her brand while making little meaningful progress on these questions from her perch inside the White House.

Recently, the Center for American Progress issued a report that gave Trump failing marks for her advocacy of women and family issues, some of which the White House considers part of her portfolio. Just last week, the administration rolled back an Obama-era rule, giving employers much greater leeway on religious or moral grounds to opt out of a mandate that the Affordable Care Act cover birth control.

“If you step back and look at the administration from equal pay to even just analyzing paid leave, this administration is one of the most regressive on women’s issues,” said Neera Tanden, president of the left-leaning think tank. “If she is the leading voice, then she is a voice of policies that hurt women.”

President Bill Clinton first enacted the child tax credit in 1997 to reduce the tax liability of families. President George W. Bush expanded it in 2001 to give families a non-refundable $1,000 a year tax credit for each child under age 17, with the generosity of the credit phasing out for married couples who earn more than $110,000 and single parents who earn more than $75,000.

Originally, Trump had pitched a new tax deduction for families that rely on formal child care arrangements such as day care, an idea pilloried by both the left and the right. Liberals hated it because they said it mostly benefited wealthy families, while the right despised it because conservatives said it gave preference to families that used paid day care and penalized stay-at-home parents, or anyone who relied child care outside of official channels.

Trump tweaked the idea, with the help of White House staffers – including Shahira Knight of the National Economic Council and Kara McKee of the Domestic Policy Council – so that it simply expands the existing child tax credit to increase the amount of credit as well as the eligibility. That’s a much easier lift politically than creating an entirely new credit.

Two top staffers from the legislative affairs office with deep ties to conservatives – Marc Short and Paul Teller – have helped her with the political outreach to conservatives throughout Washington, many of whom championed child tax credits dating back to the Republicans 1994 “Contract with America.”

She also met several times with Rubio, giving her an ally with the conservative base, which at the start of the administration expressed far more skepticism about the so-called “New York” faction of the West Wing.

That still doesn’t mean Trump’s pet idea will survive the politics of a potential overhaul of the tax code – if the White House’s ambitious plan gets through Congress at all. Expanding the child tax credit does not consume lawmakers, or even President Trump, behind-closed-doors in the same way as lowering tax rates does.

How the tax credit ends up being structured remains unclear, with the White House leaving many of those details to the tax writing committees that are trying to produce a bill this fall.

The House Republicans proposed their own version of an expanded child tax credit in their House tax blueprint in 2016 – though it differs in its structure from Rubio’s proposal. The House GOP version makes the credit more generous and the first $1,000 refundable, while the Rubio and Lee version delivers a more generous version of the credit by reducing the amount of payroll taxes families owe.

Making the existing child tax credit more generous costs money at a time when lawmakers are hunting for tax deductions and breaks to eliminate to offset potentially huge rate cuts. Already one of lawmakers’ primary targets – the elimination of the deduction of state and local taxes – has gotten blowback on Capitol Hill.

Groups that support the expansion of the tax credit have welcomed Ivanka Trump’s involvement, saying that it guarantees the White House won’t drop the issue. Even groups that do not view an expanded child tax credit as a major priority, privately say it helps round up more allies for a tax overhaul.

“When the trade-offs start happening, I don’t want the child tax credit watered down so it is just cosmetic,” said Patrick Purtill, Director of Legislative Affairs for the Faith & Freedom Coalition, which strongly supports the idea. “We want this thing to have some teeth. We don’t want just a window-dressing tax credit.”

The idea appears to be gaining momentum. A few House members broached the idea in a recent closed door meeting of the House Republican conference, according to a congressional aide. Ralph Reed, founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Caucus, brought it up during a recent dinner at the White House that President Trump held with social conservatives, according to one attendee.

Ivanka Trump championed the idea at breakfast at the headquarters of Americans for Tax Reform in early September, where Grover Norquist introduced her and she met several conservative activists and leaders.

The Chairman of the Ways & Means Committee Kevin Brady told reporters last week that an expansion was a priority.

“We believe the child tax credit should be bigger. And that more Americans should be able to use it,” Brady said. “And then it ought to be used – or able to be used – for all the needs of raising a child: whether it is for child care, or for special needs, or for saving for college. And so that’s the direction we’re heading.”

Yet the biggest case for expanding the child tax credit may come out of the White House’s own desire to ensure its tax package helps out the middle class. If lawmakers end up slashing both the corporate and individual rates, it will need a way to make any tax package helpful to families, and that is where expanding the child tax credit could emerge in a starring role.

The president himself indicated as much in early September, telling North Dakotans in a tax reform speech that expanding the child tax credit was one central plank for middle-class tax relief.

“This is a major, major tax cut – the biggest since Ronald Reagan,” the president said first to applause. This came after he had called Ivanka Trump to briefly come join him on stage.

A few minutes later, President Trump added: “So we will provide tax relief to middle-income families through a combination of benefits, such as raising their standard deduction, increasing the child tax credit, and lowering tax rates substantially.”

Anyone who believes that the middle and lower income families will benefit from any tax plan put forth by the TT or the Repugs is delusional. They keep talking up raising the standard deduction, but they fail to mention that they want to take away the personal exemption, which will negate the savings from the increased standard deduction. Ivanka couldn't care less about working families.

You know, she's like Tracey, the project manager at work who always presents some over-the-top idea every Monday morning at the meeting. Tracey always dresses just a tad too high-fashion for the job and knows exactly one personal detail about everyone. Her ideas are pointless and unachievable and are usually forgotten by Thursday, after three days of smiling pressure from her. 

Everyone rolls their eyes when Tracey gets up to present her new idea every Monday morning because everyone knows that Tracey is sleeping with Mr Scott, the boss.

[Cartmann99]

12 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Ivanka couldn't care less about working families.

Ivanka thinks her family is a working family. 

[Childless]

8 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

Ivanka thinks her family is a working family. 

I don't think Ivanka has actually worked a day in her entire life.

[GreyhoundFan]

3 hours ago, Childless said:

I don't think Ivanka has actually worked a day in her entire life.

I don't know, it's hard work to be so shallow.

[AnywhereButHere]

12 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

Ivanka thinks her family is a working family. 

Oh, isn't that just so cute of her...

 

Delusion - runs in the family!

[GrumpyGran]

7 hours ago, Childless said:

I don't think Ivanka has actually worked a day in her entire life.

Oh, come on! She has to look at Jared, coordinate her outfit for the day, give the instructions to the housekeeper, flat-iron her hair and put on her make-up, tell Jared to get dressed, compose her Barbie dream list for the day, stop to do a little 15-second dance with one of those random children who are always sitting in that breakfast nook, make sure the limo driver get the right coffee at the small, expensive coffee shop on the way to 'work', speak to Jared and kindly chastise the driver for making her late. That is all before she arrives at her newly redecorated office. Oh, and she has to go see Daddy for the daily groping. Ok, that last one may qualify as actual work.

[GreyhoundFan]

"Background check chief has 'never seen' mistakes and omissions at level of Jared Kushner forms"

Spoiler

(CNN)The head of a government bureau responsible for clearing background checks told lawmakers Wednesday he has "never seen that level of mistakes" when asked about numerous omissions in Jared Kushner's security clearance application.

Charles Phalen, the director of the National Background Investigations Bureau, a newly created division within the Office of Personnel Management, made the comment in response to a question during a House subcommittee oversight hearing.

Democrats have called on the White House to revoke security clearances granted to Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, and Ivanka Trump over reports of their use of personal email accounts and Kushner's multiple updates to his security clearance questionnaire, known as SF-86, for failing initially to include meeting with foreign officials.

Democrat Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois asked Phalen, "can you recall if there has ever been an applicant having to submit four addenda detailing over 100 errors and omissions being able to maintain their security clearance once those errors and omission have been identified?"

Phalen said he has not seen "the breadth" of all applications "but I have never seen that level of mistakes."

Earlier in the hearing, Phalen noted that OPM did not handle the fact checking of Kushner's application. "I don't know in the particular cases you're talking about because we had no visibility in our organization into any of those activities. Those were done by other organizations."

Kushner's initial SF-86 form did not mention any foreign contacts, though he quickly supplemented it to indicate that he would provide that information. He updated the form in the spring, listing about 100 contacts, but did not mention the June 2016 meeting he attended with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, Donald Trump Jr., and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. He updated the SF-86 forms once more in June to include that meeting.

Once the meeting was publicly revealed in press reports, it created a firestorm of interest especially after emails revealed Trump Jr. agreed to the meeting after being promised "very high level and sensitive information" that would "incriminate" Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, though Trump Jr. says no such information materialized.

Trump campaign officials' meetings with foreign nationals are of interest to Justice Department Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team and Congressional committees investigating Russian interference with the election.

Jamie Gorelick, an attorney for Kushner, said Thursday, "as we have previously stated, Mr. Kushner's SF-86 was prematurely submitted and, among other errors, did not list any contacts with foreign government officials. The next day, Mr. Kushner submitted supplemental information stating that he had had "numerous contacts with foreign officials" about which he would be happy to provide additional information. He submitted that supplemental information to the FBI and is cooperating fully with its background investigation."

In July, Kushner released a statement saying it was an inadvertent mistake. "I did not remember the meeting and certainly did not remember it as one with anyone who had to be included on an SF-86," Kushner said.

Earlier that month Gorelick expanded on the reason for the multiple amendments to the application form, noting, "he has since submitted this information, including that during the campaign and transition, he had over 100 calls or meetings with representatives of more than 20 countries, most of which were during transition. Mr. Kushner has submitted additional updates and included, out of an abundance of caution, this meeting with a Russian person, which he briefly attended at the request of his brother-in-law, Donald Trump Jr. As Mr. Kushner has consistently stated, he is eager to cooperate and share what he knows," Gorelick said.

A OPM spokesman said Phelan's comments was "taken out of context" but did not elaborate.

Boy, Jared's attorney should be dizzy from all the spinning.

[fraurosena]

On 13-10-2017 at 10:01 PM, GreyhoundFan said:

"Background check chief has 'never seen' mistakes and omissions at level of Jared Kushner forms"

  Hide contents

(CNN)The head of a government bureau responsible for clearing background checks told lawmakers Wednesday he has "never seen that level of mistakes" when asked about numerous omissions in Jared Kushner's security clearance application.

Charles Phalen, the director of the National Background Investigations Bureau, a newly created division within the Office of Personnel Management, made the comment in response to a question during a House subcommittee oversight hearing.

Democrats have called on the White House to revoke security clearances granted to Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, and Ivanka Trump over reports of their use of personal email accounts and Kushner's multiple updates to his security clearance questionnaire, known as SF-86, for failing initially to include meeting with foreign officials.

Democrat Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois asked Phalen, "can you recall if there has ever been an applicant having to submit four addenda detailing over 100 errors and omissions being able to maintain their security clearance once those errors and omission have been identified?"

Phalen said he has not seen "the breadth" of all applications "but I have never seen that level of mistakes."

Earlier in the hearing, Phalen noted that OPM did not handle the fact checking of Kushner's application. "I don't know in the particular cases you're talking about because we had no visibility in our organization into any of those activities. Those were done by other organizations."

Kushner's initial SF-86 form did not mention any foreign contacts, though he quickly supplemented it to indicate that he would provide that information. He updated the form in the spring, listing about 100 contacts, but did not mention the June 2016 meeting he attended with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, Donald Trump Jr., and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. He updated the SF-86 forms once more in June to include that meeting.

Once the meeting was publicly revealed in press reports, it created a firestorm of interest especially after emails revealed Trump Jr. agreed to the meeting after being promised "very high level and sensitive information" that would "incriminate" Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, though Trump Jr. says no such information materialized.

Trump campaign officials' meetings with foreign nationals are of interest to Justice Department Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team and Congressional committees investigating Russian interference with the election.

Jamie Gorelick, an attorney for Kushner, said Thursday, "as we have previously stated, Mr. Kushner's SF-86 was prematurely submitted and, among other errors, did not list any contacts with foreign government officials. The next day, Mr. Kushner submitted supplemental information stating that he had had "numerous contacts with foreign officials" about which he would be happy to provide additional information. He submitted that supplemental information to the FBI and is cooperating fully with its background investigation."

In July, Kushner released a statement saying it was an inadvertent mistake. "I did not remember the meeting and certainly did not remember it as one with anyone who had to be included on an SF-86," Kushner said.

Earlier that month Gorelick expanded on the reason for the multiple amendments to the application form, noting, "he has since submitted this information, including that during the campaign and transition, he had over 100 calls or meetings with representatives of more than 20 countries, most of which were during transition. Mr. Kushner has submitted additional updates and included, out of an abundance of caution, this meeting with a Russian person, which he briefly attended at the request of his brother-in-law, Donald Trump Jr. As Mr. Kushner has consistently stated, he is eager to cooperate and share what he knows," Gorelick said.

A OPM spokesman said Phelan's comments was "taken out of context" but did not elaborate.

Boy, Jared's attorney should be dizzy from all the spinning.

Which entity is responsible for security clearings anyway? The DOJ? Who is in dereliction of duty here, and to whom do they owe accountability? I know, these are sort of rhetorical questions as the answer is probably either the Maniacal Moron himself or Congress. 

[GreyhoundFan]

Poor deluded Ivanka. "Ivanka Trump’s Tweet About Breaking Down Barriers For Women Backfired". I am not going to quote here, because there are lots and lots of tweets, many of which are awesome.

[SnazzyNazzy]

I remember back in the day I stumbled across a gossip site, that had an interesting tidbit about Ivanka.

It wasn't very salacious, but interesting nontheless. Here goes...

Basically, back in the day, when she was late teen'ish, she wanted to be a model, ala Kendall Jenner, Gigi Hadid etc. It was very "I'm Ivanka Trump, and I want to be a model". The thing is, back in the day, she didn't quite look like she does now. She has more of her mom's genes, BUT she has a lot of her dad's too. 

So, according to this site I found, all the modelling agencies pretty much outright rejected her, because while she was tall and slim, she looked like her dad in drag. SO, allegedly, she had bucket loads of plastic surgery to "soften" her features, and look less like her dad. It was allegedly  some serious plastic surgery too, like jaw shaving, stuff like that.

So the kicker is, according to this site, that she went back after getting all of this surgery done, the modelling agencies STILL rejected her. 

While I know this is gossip, and to be taken with a grain of salt, it is a plausible scenario. For one thing, you know she was not born with the nose that is currently on her face, it is too small and "done" looking. Also, if you see old pictures of her, she looks totally different. Not the "well she just lost her "baby fat" different, but tweaks to the bone structure different.

I miss that site, because it had some GREAT gossip on it.