But her emails
Oops.
Ivanka Trump sent hundreds of emails last year to White House aides, Cabinet officials and her assistants using a personal account, many of them in violation of federal records rules, according to people familiar with a White House examination of her correspondence.
White House ethics officials learned of Trump’s repeated use of personal email when reviewing emails gathered last fall by five Cabinet agencies to respond to a public records lawsuit. That review revealed that throughout much of 2017, she often discussed or relayed official White House business using a private email account with a domain that she shares with her husband, Jared Kushner.
The discovery alarmed some advisers to President Trump, who feared that his daughter’s practices bore similarities to the personal email use of Hillary Clinton…
Ya think?
Some aides were startled by the volume of Ivanka Trump’s personal emails — and taken aback by her response when questioned about the practice. Trump said she was not familiar with some details of the rules, according to people with knowledge of her reaction.
Why are they surprised? It’s obvious that Princess thinks she is entitled to her job in the administration with no qualifications demanded or rules imposed. She’s the first daughter, as she yelled at Steve Bannon when he tried to tell her to back off. (Not that I have any sympathy for Bannon. I think each is as disgusting as the other.)
Did she? I must have missed that. Or scraped the memory out of my brain with a rusty fork because it was too embarrassing to admit belonging to the same species. The alternatives are functionally the same, but I kind of want it to be the fork one.
I don’t get why there is such a thing as a First Lady in the first place, let alone a First Daughter. In the UK, Prime Ministers’ spouses have had no political influence at all. Well, maybe Cherie Blair, for some reason. And that was mostly about making millions on after dinner speeches after his office had ended, as if she hadn’t had an extraordinary career in her own right.
I know ‘First Daughter’ is nonsense, but America does seem to have political expectations of its First Lady. It’s almost as if you want royals after all. You can have ours if you like, they’re shit.
What would Bill Clinton have been called if Hilary had won? The First.. Man? The First… Gentleman?
There’s a cat that lives at #10 Downing Street. I think we should start calling it The First Cat. And I think we all know that Fortran will sooner or later become the First Cat. You think Trump has changed politics forever? Wait until Fortran becomes First Cat.
Daddy’s letting the Chinese listen in on an insecure phone, so hell, why not let the Princess use her private e-mail? Why should he be the one doing all the leaking?
latsot @ 1 – it’s in the Bob Woodward book, and appeared frequently in reporting on same. (What is? The Bannon v Princess brawl.)
I feel as though I kind of knew that. It’s the fork then.
LOCK HER UP!
LOCK HER UP!
Latsot @2, we all know that cats are really just small gods (with an underlying attitude that they’d be big Gods if they could be bothered trying – but it’s not that important compared to food and sleep and maybe a warm lap). As I currently don’t have a cat, assure Fortran that when he becomes g(G)od, I shall be a devoted and unquestioning follower.
Rob, that is impossible, as my cat already is god…well, actually goddess, since she huffs if anyone misgenders her. Her Majesty Pepper is not planning on giving up her position soon.
I misgendered a god!? I’m dooooomed.
Dogs have masters and mistresses. Cats have staff.
True of every cat and dog I have ever known.
All this time, “but her emails” was in reference to the First Daughter!
I’m curious – what is her sister called?
“The Second Daughter”?
Or…
“What Sister?”
With respect to latsot’s remarks, I think it needs to be recognised that the American president is essentially a late 18th-century monarch, but one who is elected for a term or two, and has much more, and more far-reaching power, than any European monarch has (and more power, I suspect, than most late 18th-century monarchs had).
Screechy’s analysis is best. Lock her up!
tigger, I believe it’s Tiffany, although in true Homer-style Trump knows her as ‘the other one’.
AoS, yes, I know her name; thank you for the heads-up. I wrote the first sentence of my comment badly. I should have written:
@latsot #1 – if we’re going with the European royalty parallels, Bill Clinton would have surely been the First Consort.
@Tim:
It has certainly been remarked that monarch/emperor (particularly of the British variety) was the model on which the office of president was based, but I’m not sure that’s true. It looks to me like a genuine attempt to separate out the things that ought to be separate albeit as viewed through the lens of rich white dudes.
And yet here we are.
@Karellen
Yes, that makes sense. Well, the “consort” part, anyway. I’m still unable to cope with the “first” part. Isn’t the whole point that anyone [rich enough] can be president? So what’s with this “first” business? Where does this weird expectation of influence and/or respect come from? I’ll admit that a lot of Brits still think that being hefted from a royal vagina automatically grants slavish respect but even then only if they dance like monkeys in the tabloids upon our command. We think of Prime Ministers as the people we complain to when, say, someone wakes us up a bit too early on a Sunday morning to inform us about Jesus. We don’t afford much respect either to the office or its incumbent. This “Mr President” business is alien to us, even while the few people who qualify to meet the royals capitulate with the “majesty” business.
Fun fact: I met a (serving at the time) Prime Minister, once. It was in a tin scout hut in a former pit village in County Durham and I was demonstrating some software I was already regretting being the architect of. He went off to be a war criminal and I went off to do whatever it is I do now.
Anyway, it still seems to me that some of the trappings of royalty have been eagerly dragged along with the totally-not-royalty office of president.
Do presidential grandchildren have a number? What about presidential nieces and nephews? It’s not as though they aren’t usually as inbred as our royals.
latsot, you’ve actually hit on something most Americans seem to miss. We are supposed to be a classless society, and therefore not have “firsts”, “seconds”, etc. The Constitution was set up to divest the country of a monarch, and the president had few powers initially. Presidents throughout the 20th century have claimed so much power for themselves that a lot of people assume it has always been that way.
One thing I’ve noticed is that the American public is intensely interested in royals. Even though the founding of this country was predicated on all (white landowning males) were equal, and attempted to move away from a royal model, people seem to crave the impression of royalty, at least. So we elevate singers, sports legends, and movie stars to a near royal status, roll out red carpets, and eagerly wait for a magic healing touch from the celebrity of choice. It was probably inevitable that some of this would become invested in the president before the country was very old.
@latsot #19 – the “first” thing could originate from primus inter pares – “Primus inter pares is a Latin phrase meaning first among equals. It is typically used as an honorary title for those who are formally equal to other members of their group but are accorded unofficial respect”.
Latsot, the president’s family is the “first family” and everyone in it is a “first”. They are not numbered. “First lady” is very common, and occasionally you hear of first children, although that is not very common, and the “first” title is rarely applied beyond that.
The VP’s family is sometimes called the “second family”, his wife the “second lady”, etc., although this is less commonly used.
“First gentlemen” has been the title for husbands of governors and would presumably be for husbands of presidents as well.
The whole “first” thing is pretty informal and I don’t think really comparable to elaborate official titles in a monarchy.
Except the Trumps take it seriously. They believe it is comparable, and they act accordingly.
Who says? According to what book of rules, or is it an actual law?
The whole point is that it’s all quite arbitrary and absurd, yet it gets recapitulated all the time as if it were genuinely Official and Binding on All. I hate the label “First Lady” myself, and don’t use it – and as for “FLOTUS”…*gagging noises*