Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
he has lawyers trying to find the loopholes now--so he can set up the family dynasty
In speaking of lawyers- does anyone one know it works- with all those upcoming lawsuits??
If he is the company holder/ main owner - and has a lawsuits- how does he get rid of the company when that's not settled-? anyone understand what I am asking?
These people are looking for loopholes everywhere. Isn't that what Trump criticized while campaigning?
Corruption, corruption, corruption? Drain the swamp? Get rid of loopholes that some use? That sure doesn't appear to be what is happening at all. He is creating jobs for attorneys by presenting all kinds of legal conflicts of interest to be challenged. And they will be--count on it.
Trump has his 5-star hotel on leased federal land, and is in court seeking a refund on property taxes!
He will be in charge of the IRS while being audited (or so he says).
And according to his media mouth, Kellyanne, he has found a way around the nepotism law. Huh?
And just when I didn't think the Democrats could get any lower.
Lemme get this straight: you voted for mouthpiece Trump, one of the most vile, uncouth individuals in America, who insults everyone he can, but you are offended by someone suggesting that his marriage might not be as strong as he wants us to think? Uh, the guy doesn't have a good track record when it comes to marriage. And you sound like a snowflake who needs a safe place.
And get this: I'm NOT a Democrat. I'm not caught up in the Democrat vs Republican hyper-partisan American political trap, incapable of critical reasoning beyond it. You, apparently are.
It would probably be a good thing to remember that when a person becomes President of the United States - they are not obligated to ignore their family. The Trump family is a close family - the Trump Campaign was mainly run by the Family ..... Particularly the Primary. That same family will be there whenever President Trump wants they there. They won't be "paid employees", they are his Family.
Actually the 1967 anti-nepotism law would say that they ARE in face required to do so in some ways.
Quote:
"A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."
Details. Note that this was passed after the examples you provided.
The unpaid part might prove a interesting discussion. Given the massive conflicts of interest, her simply being present for things, and communicating it on may provide grounds for impeachment for example.
Look, even if you are a Trump supporter, you have to recognize the danger here. Do you want Trump to have Ryan simply tell him "Stop your attempts to XYZ, sign all of our bills, or I am going to use this to impeach you"?
Most likely, Ivanka will be doing duties that are typically done by the first lady, while Melania hides in NY.
IMO, Melania will be first lady in name only because Ivanka will be the stand-in most of the time. There will be a some occasions when Melania appears as first lady, but mostly it will be Ivanka.
So what? What if the president were single or a widower?
RFK was a Senator, JFK's campaign manager and closest advisor. JFK nominated him for AG and the Senate confirmed.
What's different is that RFK was not running 500+ corporations in two dozen countries on behalf of JFK.
JFK did not owe $ billions to domestic and foreign banks.
RFK was not meeting with Saudi Royalty to partner and develop resort properties in Saudi Arabia.
None of Trump's children and one spouse are paid advisors. That however does nothing to eliminate the perception of a conflict of interest.
hahaha!
you will seriously go to any and all ends to discredit Trump and defend liberals. this is cute.
I mean I don't even know what to think here. are you serious?
JFK nominated his BROTHER to be AG because his father demanded he do so.RFK was NOT a senator. He was a senate committee aid. The senate held a voice vote, because they knew they didn't have the actual votes. This is part of the public record. its not even disputed. AND JFK even joked about the fact that Bobby had no real experience.
As you say RFK was a very close advisor to JFK. THEN it was ok and NOW its not?
The only perception of a conflict of interest is the rantings of those of you on the left are saying something exists that doesn't.
hahaha!
you will seriously go to any and all ends to discredit Trump and defend liberals. this is cute.
I mean I don't even know what to think here. are you serious?
JFK nominated his BROTHER to be AG because his father demanded he do so. The senate held a voice vote, because they knew they didn't have the actual votes. This is part of the public record. its not even disputed. AND JFK even joked about the fact that Bobby had no real experience.
As you say RFK was a very close advisor to JFK. THEN it was ok and NOW its not?
The only perception of a conflict of interest is the rantings of those of you on the left are saying something exists that doesn't.
They passed a LAW in 1967 specifically because of this.
Lmao at all the Trump defenders twisting themselves into pretzels. This is going to be fun.
what pretzel?
dude this is so straight forward.
1. Ivanka would not be the first or even the 14th non-spouse to handle FLOTUS duties.
2. Ivanka is not going to be part of the team running the Trump businesses.
3. There is no evidence whatsoever that there is any conflict of interest with Trump.
4. The President of the United States is excluded from laws/rules governing conflicts of interest. BY US CODE the president is not subject to conflict of interest laws. period. end of story.
The pretzeling is coming from those making charges that have been utterly refuted... then they move the target to find something new to stick.
They passed a LAW in 1967 specifically because of this.
SO YES. THEN it was OK, and NOW its not.
nice, so what you are saying and what I agree with is that a hired position might be against the law. lets be honest though, there is no indication that TheDonald has broken any law, or even come close to it.
dude this is so straight forward.
1. Ivanka would not be the first or even the 14th non-spouse to handle FLOTUS duties.
2. Ivanka is not going to be part of the team running the Trump businesses.
3. There is no evidence whatsoever that there is any conflict of interest with Trump.
4. The President of the United States is excluded from laws/rules governing conflicts of interest. BY US CODE the president is not subject to conflict of interest laws. period. end of story.
The pretzeling is coming from those making charges that have been utterly refuted... then they move the target to find something new to stick.
By SPECIFIC law he is covered by the 1967 nepotism laws. In fact the president is called out specifically.
The constitution also lays out some limits. the emolument clause of the constitution also lays out limits.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
