It was ok a few years ago… what changed?
My apologies, you are the only trump supporter that has answered the question so far.
I agree. even though WatsApp claims it has a secure end to end encryption, it’s not an approved transport for sensitive or classified material. Federal employees should conduct all official business thru official communications.
However, the reality is that people do have private lives. I private personal communication can start out unofficial, and then sometimes cross over from personal, to professional.
My idea was to create an app, that will monitor communications from any personal app, and when a conversation turns to more of a professional nature, you could select an option to convert that communication and copy it to an official email exchange.
What was OK a few years ago? Using whatsapp or gmail or aol for official communications? I don’t remember anyone advocating that. Unless you did.
Using a private email server? I never thought that was OK. Stupid. Probably not criminal. For both Colin Powell and Hillary Clinton.
Is that speculation on your part, or is it fact?
BTW, our federal email system does not use end to end encryption with recipients who are on a private email domain server, so in that regard, it is antiquated.
It seemed more likely that the Saudi Crown Prince he was chatting to wanted to use WhatsApp as a secure communications, and for whatever reason he did not want to use his standard email system.
I’m not clear what you mean, are you saying.
Are you implying that if a federal employee sends me an email, that it will be automatically encrypted on both ends? I’ve received official .gov emails from federal employees before, they most definitely are not encrypted.
Feel the same way about Jared?
1 Like
Me try again?? You did not cite any mention of dealing in “sensitive information” in your reply, so do not pretend I failed to cite that specific.
I’m not going to play hide and seek, if you have a relevant point to make, just spit it out already.
Just a couple years ago, a high ranking federal employee could traffic in the open with Top Secret information, and it was resulted in nothing but an eye roll of bored annoyance from the Democrats. Now discussing anything, with anyone, well… it’s a national security issue.
If the private e-mail domain server is antiquated and isn’t up to date with the current e-mail security protocols such as DMARC and SPF (which the gov’t has almost fully implemented), then the communication will be rejected.
Kushner shouldn’t have agreed.
No, I’m stating that WhatsApp uses end to end encryption that no one from the outside can see, including the gov’t and WhatsApp itself.
By the way, Facebook owns WhatsApp.
You gotta remember when the whole Hillary private server issue came to light. Republicans rushed to that thread, all flailing their arms, torches in hand, yelling and screaming that she should be in jail. It’s illegal. Never been done before.
Then a few sane posters pointed out that Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell also did it. Then the excuses flowed as to why it was okay for Rice and Powell to do it, but Hillary is a criminal and should go to jail.
1 Like
I didn’t know this…
“In December 2015, it was reported that Islamic State terrorists had been using WhatsApp to plot the November 2015 Paris attacks.[157] ISIS also uses WhatsApp to traffic sex slaves.”
But her E-MAILS.
Just need Tubby Trump to gather up part of the Red Hat Mob (RHM) and get him to chant it, I’m sure the RHM would be easily be duped into repeating it.
My point is that a mom and pop email domain server is not secure communications, not by default at least WhatsApp is.
But I’m not even trying to make this about security, and you alluded to this yourself. When Jared communicates with anyone on WhatsApp, there is no record of it sent to the federal records department. A screenshot sent to the records department is not very useful, since is does not lend itself to being word searched or sorted.
No argument with me there.
Which would make it more secure, than using a mom and pop email domain service from Platte River Networks.
However, I do see your point. If Jared were dealing in clandestine conversations, or those involving classified material, or simply engaging in unauthorized national policy negotiations, he could hide them from FOIA requests, which we should all disapprove of.
2 Likes
I’m glad we’re in agreement. You also agree that Kushner should be investigated?
Tell you one thing, using an app that has a complete lack of transparency leads to a much higher possibility of investigators showing a case of scienter.
1 Like
No I don’t. You should not start new investigations every time you make an assumption, without any evidence to support it, that it is possible someone might be doing x,y or z.
If that were the way our justice department worked, I could assume that it’s possible Jared could be stealing White House china, and stockpiling office supplies, and start a criminal investigation into that.
However, if you know he has already used his third party software apps to engage in communications with foreign diplomats, you can counsel him not to do it in the future, or be punished, removed from his position, etc…
Exactly what assumption, evidence and x,y,z are you referring to? Thats pretty vague. Is it reasonable to investigate his use and ensure his actions meet guidelines and law?
So much keyboard Diarrhea from the right this week…
1 Like
What’s vague is the assumption that Jared engaged in some vague and unknown illegal activity.
A criminal or counter-Intel investigation is not warranted. There is no evidence to suggest Jared used WhatsApp to engage in any traitorous, or illegal activity.
If simply using the app was sufficient grounds to open an investigation, then anyone in the federal government who used WhatsApp would also need to be investigated.
At least Jared Kushner informed that he was taking screenshots of WhatsApp conversations as a way of staying in compliance with record-keeping law. All those other federal employees who have not revealed there use of the app, hmm… are they breaking the law? Let’s just assume they could be, and investigate them too. See how silly that is?
