It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Trump to name son-in-law Jared Kushner as special adviser

page: 1
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+14 more 
posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:36 PM
link   
...that'd be Ivanka's husband, btw.



Donald Trump is planning to appoint son-in-law Jared Kushner to a presidential advisory position, aides said Monday, arguing that nepotism laws do not apply to White House appointees.

Trump appeared to confirm the Kushner appointment in short question-and-answer sessions with reporters, telling them that "we'll talk about that on Wednesday" at a scheduled news conference.

Aides said the husband of Ivanka Trump is working to wrap up his own business affairs in preparation for a move to Washington
www.usatoday.com...


This is going to be a mess - or should.



In 1967, just a few years after President John Kennedy appointed his brother, Robert, as attorney general, Congress passed anti-nepotism laws barring appointments of relatives.


So it's clearly against the law.

Now... First Ladies (at least since the time of Eleanor Roosevelt) traditionally serve in some sort of public "advisor" capacity or leader on a social project of their choosing and that's not considered nepotism. They're trying to wave Jared in on a much bigger position under the "first ladies" exclusion rule.

This would not be a good thing. Mind you, it's not surprising (and I think this is just a slide around his putting Ivanka in a powerful position, which might get challenged) but it's not good. We don't need our elected officials giving jobs to their relatives.



+2 more 
posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

In an arena with nothing but liars/fakes/thieves... I think surrounding yourself with family is the best idea one could have.

Perhaps the law exists so the liars and fakes can be the ones giving Donald the reports instead?
edit on 9-1-2017 by chadderson because: (no reason given)


+10 more 
posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: Byrd

In an arena with nothing but liars/fakes/thieves... I think surrounding yourself with family is the best idea one could have.

Perhaps the law exists so the liars and fakes can be the ones giving Donald the reports instead?


Did the fact that nepotism is a crime escape you?



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

I guess I don't understand. If it's against the law, it will be pointed out and not allowed. If it's legal, and he clearly is a pretty sharp guy, then what exactly is the issue?


+8 more 
posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Byrd

I guess I don't understand. If it's against the law, it will be pointed out and not allowed. If it's legal, and he clearly is a pretty sharp guy, then what exactly is the issue?


Thought you guys we're done with dynasties?

Perhaps I'm wrong on that.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
How good of an advisor to the president does anyone think he will be? I guess it doesn't matter because Donald don't need no advise since he's the man! LOL
I sure am glad weed is legal in my home state because I don't think alcohol is going to cut it this time.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: Byrd

In an arena with nothing but liars/fakes/thieves... I think surrounding yourself with family is the best idea one could have.

Perhaps the law exists so the liars and fakes can be the ones giving Donald the reports instead?


Did the fact that nepotism is a crime escape you?


It's a made-up crime by politicians, likely GOP politicians, who thought it was "unfair" that Kennedy named his own brother Attorney General.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Byrd

I guess I don't understand. If it's against the law, it will be pointed out and not allowed. If it's legal, and he clearly is a pretty sharp guy, then what exactly is the issue?


Thought you guys we're done with dynasties?

Perhaps I'm wrong on that.


Oh, so he will be the RNC's candidate in 2020? I missed that part in the story, perhaps you can point it out?



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:56 PM
link   
I could be wrong, but an Advisor is just that, an Advisor, it's not an actual position of any authority, such as Attorney General, an Advisor to the Prez would have no recognized authority over anybody.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Byrd

I guess I don't understand. If it's against the law, it will be pointed out and not allowed. If it's legal, and he clearly is a pretty sharp guy, then what exactly is the issue?


Thought you guys we're done with dynasties?

Perhaps I'm wrong on that.


Oh, so he will be the RNC's candidate in 2020? I missed that part in the story, perhaps you can point it out?


I think you know what I meant, but are deciding to play coy.
I'll leave you to that. 😂



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

So you had no problem with Chelsea being on the payroll of the Clinton Foundation? Or how about when the Right took issue with Bernie having members of his family on his campaign staff? You didn't take issue with that?



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

actually, I am at a loss as to how this is a "dynasty" in any way? He could pick anyone in the US to be his adviser, yet he picks this kid who married his daughter. A kid who seems to be pretty smart and successful on his own. Perhaps you can explain the dynasty part to me.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Byrd

I guess I don't understand. If it's against the law, it will be pointed out and not allowed. If it's legal, and he clearly is a pretty sharp guy, then what exactly is the issue?


Thought you guys we're done with dynasties?

Perhaps I'm wrong on that.


Where you are wrong is with the definition of dynasty,
A dynasty is a succession of people from the same family passing power down to the next.

This is the Trump families first foray into politics so a dynasty makes no sense. Especially if he is just appointing people to positions who appear to be the best candidate for said position.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

LOL, actually I didn't really care. I was a bit put out when they used the non profit funds to pay for her wedding, but her position in a family owned (money laundering scheme) was something that didn't concern me. Should I have been angry?



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: JAY1980

a succession of people from the same family who play a prominent role in business, politics, or another field.
"the Ford dynasty"


synonyms: bloodline, line, ancestral line, lineage, house, family, ancestry, descent, succession, genealogy, family tree; More
regime, rule, reign, empire, sovereignty


"the fourth king of the Shang dynasty"

See, he can commit murder so of course dynasty means something else for Trump.


+9 more 
posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Lets take a look at the last 2 weeks for Trump and the right wing congress:

First they wanted to repeal the independence ethics committee.

Then they try to usher in a ton of appointees where several of them have major conflicts of interest, including Trump.

Now, Trump names son-in-law as a WH advisor.

Drain the swamp my arse. Trump's administration is running the show like it's some kind of dictatorial cabal. The sad part about it is that many on this board will try to legitimize this action somehow. But deep down inside, you know as well as everyone else does, that this is creating a disastrous precedence for our Country. Even more sad is that you are okay about this because he has a (R) next to his name. Would you support a (D) the same way? If not, you should condemn these actions.



edit on 9-1-2017 by SeekingAlpha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

The Nepotism law, or whatever it's called, will be amended. I hope Trump has at least learned from Obama that laws can be changed and ignored when its convenient.



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: SeekingAlpha
Lets take a look at the last 2 weeks for Trump and the right wing congress:

First they wanted to repeal the independence ethics committee.

Then they try to usher in a ton of appointees where several of them have major conflicts of interest, including Trump.

Now, Trump names son-in-law as a WH advisor.

Drain the swamp my arse. Trump's administration is running the show like it's some kind of dictatorial cabal. The sad part about it is that many on this board will try to legitimize this action somehow. But deep down inside, you know as well as everyone else does, that this is creating a disastrous precedence for our Country. Even more sad is that you are okay about this because he has a (R) next to his name. Would you support a (D) the same way? If not, you should condemn these actions.




Um...did I miss the damn inauguration?



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
You too late with this one. Already been declared ok due to the rules DO NOT apply to appointed cabinet members



posted on Jan, 9 2017 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha


Is Trump turning in the US into North Korea? Because that's how North Korea was run.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join