Kushner's lawyer accidentally forwards letter revealing he failed to disclose private email account to Senate

Donald Trump’s son-in-law and top advisor Jared Kushner failed to disclose a personal email account he used to conduct government business when he spoke with the Senate intelligence committee in July, according to an email inadvertently forwarded by Kushner's lawyer and subsequently shared with CNN’s Jake Tapper.

As Tapper reports, committee chairman Sen Richard Burr (R-NC) and vice chairman Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) first learned about Kushner’s email set-up from media reports, after Politico on Monday revealed the Trump adviser created a private email address in December—during the tail-end of the transition—to correspond with other Trump aides. Kushner reportedly created that account in tandem with his official White House email account.

A lawyer for Kushner confirmed the account’s existence to CNN. "Mr. Kushner uses his White House email address to conduct White House business," Abbe Lowell said in a statement Monday. "Fewer than a hundred emails from January through August were either sent to or returned by Mr. Kushner to colleagues in the White House from his personal email account."

On Thursday, Burr and Warner wrote to Kushner about the email revelations, demanding he turn over all relevant documents pertaining to the Russian inquiry, and emphasizing Kushner should submit “all email accounts, messaging apps, or similar communication channels” related to their request.

As Tapper reports, CNN first learned of Burr and Warner’s letter to Kushner via the self-described “email prankster” who’s managed to trick multiple Trump officials into embarrassing and potentially dangerous correspondences over the past several months. Thursday, Lowell apparently tried to forward the Senate intelligence committee’s letter, when he inadvertently sent it to the email prankster.

In a statement to CNN, Lowell tried to downplay Burr and Warner’s request.

"It is perfectly normal that the committees would want to make sure that they received all pertinent records,” he said. “We did review this account at the time and there were no responsive or relevant documents there. The committee was so informed when documents were produced and there is no issue here."