Gromdor Posted January 21, 2017 #1 Share Posted January 21, 2017 Looks like Donald Trump will be able to appoint/hire family members into government jobs: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/doj-weighs-in-on-trump-hiring-son-in-law-to-be-on-white-house-staff/ar-AAm665G?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp Normally the anti-nepotism law makes it a crime for a government official to appoint or hire someone who is related to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sees Posted January 21, 2017 #2 Share Posted January 21, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Michelle Posted January 21, 2017 Popular Post #3 Share Posted January 21, 2017 Odd they didn't mention Bill Clinton circumvented those same laws when he hired Hillary while in the White House. I guess it all depends on who they want to make look responsible and who they want to pretend is innocent. 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted January 21, 2017 Author #4 Share Posted January 21, 2017 59 minutes ago, Michelle said: Odd they didn't mention Bill Clinton circumvented those same laws when he hired Hillary while in the White House. I guess it all depends on who they want to make look responsible and who they want to pretend is innocent. Got a source for that? I am curious if we have a trend towards nepotism in our government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted January 21, 2017 #5 Share Posted January 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, Gromdor said: Got a source for that? I am curious if we have a trend towards nepotism in our government. Sigh...it took me about thirty seconds to find eight or nine sources for it in this thread. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/302939-kushner-in-charge-of-peace-in-the-middle-east/#comment-6042156 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careful_perspective Posted January 21, 2017 #6 Share Posted January 21, 2017 http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/11/presidential-nepotism-debate-goes-back-to-the-founders-time/ Lots of Presidents have done it. I think his son-in-law will do a great job, why not disqualify him due to his relation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted January 21, 2017 Author #7 Share Posted January 21, 2017 So the answer is "yes" we do have a trend towards nepotism in the US going back as far as the founding fathers apparently. Makes you wonder why they passed a law forbidding others in government from doing it, no? On a side not: I always viewed the Hillary on health care thing as her chosen social reform as first lady. Kind of like how Melania is going to crusade against cyber bullying. The whole thing reminds me on how it is illegal to insider trade, unless you are in Congress. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thanato Posted January 21, 2017 #8 Share Posted January 21, 2017 Now there is the question of when there will be a conflict of interest between his business and his position. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlitterRose Posted January 22, 2017 #9 Share Posted January 22, 2017 First actions as the President of the forgotten... Make the first moves to toss millions of them off of health care with no alternative plan in place Move to circumvent laws on the books so he can appoint people it is illegal to appoint Do away with a provision that benefited people buying their first homes. Oh...and something about patriotism. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=9&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjmvtiKuNTRAhUJxlQKHcj4D0gQqQIIRCgAMAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftime.com%2F4641565%2Fdonald-trump-president-first-day%2F&usg=AFQjCNGx129_ekE0txEErCKcP-g_8k10jA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Careful_perspective Posted January 22, 2017 #10 Share Posted January 22, 2017 15 minutes ago, ChaosRose said: First actions as the President of the forgotten... Make the first moves to toss millions of them off of health care with no alternative plan in place Move to circumvent laws on the books so he can appoint people it is illegal to appoint Do away with a provision that benefited people buying their first homes. Oh...and something about patriotism. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=9&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjmvtiKuNTRAhUJxlQKHcj4D0gQqQIIRCgAMAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftime.com%2F4641565%2Fdonald-trump-president-first-day%2F&usg=AFQjCNGx129_ekE0txEErCKcP-g_8k10jA I feel like your post is really sensationalist. Did you pickup a job for CNN along the way? He signed an order that no revisions can be made any further. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted January 22, 2017 #11 Share Posted January 22, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Rinna said: I feel like your post is really sensationalist. Did you pickup a job for CNN along the way? He signed an order that no revisions can be made any further. And, I believe it said to postpone all tax penalties imposed. Ya know, those the IRS charge you for not signing up for Obamacare you can't afford either. You can't exactly get kicked off a health care plan you just signed a contract for, for the year. I think the deadline has officially passed for this year. Edited January 22, 2017 by Michelle 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolguy Posted January 22, 2017 #12 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Yes bill hired his wife to run something in the government libs for get this 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorvir Posted January 22, 2017 #13 Share Posted January 22, 2017 4 hours ago, Rinna said: I feel like your post is really sensationalist. It's not just that, it's irrational, lie-based hatred. And nothing you say, no amount of glaring facts, will make them stop with the crap-spewing. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorvir Posted January 22, 2017 #14 Share Posted January 22, 2017 6 hours ago, Michelle said: Odd they didn't mention Bill Clinton circumvented those same laws when he hired Hillary while in the White House. I guess it all depends on who they want to make look responsible and who they want to pretend is innocent. Because it's only wrong if a Republican/conservative does these things. If a leftist does it, there's nothing wrong with it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted January 22, 2017 #15 Share Posted January 22, 2017 (edited) I read about this back in November. Basically the President is fireproof against many, many limitations that other Federal Employees have to submit to. He could even still run his Trump Corporation from the White House if he wanted to. There's nothing anyone could do about it. This applies to the DC Hotel thing also. Though that has specific writing in the contract, which may require some kind of action by Trump. I suppose it could be argued that the Hotel is run by the Corporation and not Trump himself? http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-the-president-cant-have-a-conflict-of-interest-231760 Edited January 22, 2017 by DieChecker 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted January 22, 2017 Author #16 Share Posted January 22, 2017 (edited) 10 hours ago, DieChecker said: I read about this back in November. Basically the President is fireproof against many, many limitations that other Federal Employees have to submit to. He could even still run his Trump Corporation from the White House if he wanted to. There's nothing anyone could do about it. This applies to the DC Hotel thing also. Though that has specific writing in the contract, which may require some kind of action by Trump. I suppose it could be argued that the Hotel is run by the Corporation and not Trump himself? http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-the-president-cant-have-a-conflict-of-interest-231760 He can do just that and it seems he wants to. However the constitution does have the emoluments clause that makes certain things in that course of action into an impeachable offence. They are two different things, but related. Edited January 22, 2017 by Gromdor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarakore Posted January 24, 2017 #17 Share Posted January 24, 2017 (edited) On 1/21/2017 at 4:10 PM, Michelle said: Odd they didn't mention Bill Clinton circumvented those same laws when he hired Hillary while in the White House. I guess it all depends on who they want to make look responsible and who they want to pretend is innocent. On 1/21/2017 at 5:15 PM, Michelle said: Sigh...it took me about thirty seconds to find eight or nine sources for it in this thread. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/302939-kushner-in-charge-of-peace-in-the-middle-east/#comment-6042156 Clinton did not circumvent. He got a ruling in his favor by two federal judges who happened to be appointed by a Republican. I am glad Trump has also been extended the use of this legality and hope Kushner goes far. Jared is highly educated, was the glue to Trump's campaign, had his own employee write in his newspaper that Trump was using anti-Semitic symbolism, and he did not fire her, plus is letting his brother-in-law take the paper over. His father had legal troubles so it might be that he knows the pitfalls and would prefer to be squeaky clean. As in Independent from a Democratic family they all supported Trump putting family first. He is one of the bright spots in the Trump team and I would not be surprised if one day he also takes the high office of President of these United States. A George P. Bush/Jared Kushner ticket in 2024 would be my favorites for Republican or whatever-party-they-want-to-be ticket. I'd probably vote for them if there was no credible progressive candidate. They both seem sensible. I have great hope that their generation and those who come after it, even in other countries, will be the change our country and world needs. Edited January 24, 2017 by Avatar Samantha Ai 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarakore Posted January 24, 2017 #18 Share Posted January 24, 2017 (edited) On 1/22/2017 at 1:17 AM, DieChecker said: I read about this back in November. Basically the President is fireproof against many, many limitations that other Federal Employees have to submit to. He could even still run his Trump Corporation from the White House if he wanted to. There's nothing anyone could do about it. This applies to the DC Hotel thing also. Though that has specific writing in the contract, which may require some kind of action by Trump. I suppose it could be argued that the Hotel is run by the Corporation and not Trump himself? http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-the-president-cant-have-a-conflict-of-interest-231760 Trump is still the owner. Maybe it will have to be decided by a judge since it is a foggy situation. Most past presidents could afford to divest their businesses as they had the wealth already plus the connections to recoup after their term. Trump is wealthy but is alone in this world. A hustler and hard worker. To give up the business he inherited from his father as a sacrifice to be president is not fair in his situation. Hopefully the law can square up and side with his current situation, owner but not in control, and set a new precedent for our head of state, so that when he is finished with his term he can still have what is his to pass on to his sons and daughters. It would also allow others who are not part of the Good Ole Boy Club to be able to aspire the presidency. Which is good. Edited January 24, 2017 by Avatar Samantha Ai 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted January 24, 2017 #19 Share Posted January 24, 2017 On 1/21/2017 at 6:34 PM, Gromdor said: Makes you wonder why they passed a law forbidding others in government from doing it, no? I think it is it a great law to have. I think the president should have the same laws. It is much more important the further down you go though. I don't know how much it is enforced on local levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now