Who Can Legally Be Hired By Trump?

Is it illegal, or not?

This may help clear up any confusion as to who can, or cannot be hired by the President of the USA.

I found what might be the best link and explanation for this question.

www.quora.com...

“Which laws been enacted to prevent family members of a president from serving in his cabinet? Since Robert F. Kennedy became the Attorney General during President Kennedy's administration, he was the last person to have served under his own brother's presidency. After that laws (e.g., 5 US Code § 3110) have prevented such a thing to happen again. “

Who can be hired?

it doesn’t actually prevent a relative from serving the President, they just can’t serve in an official agency position, but if they do, they just can’t be paid. The statute does not have a remedy if the President chooses to ignore it, if the position is outside an agency, say a task force, like the one Hillary was appointed to under President Clinton.

Nepotism is that what is going on, and is this against the law?

It is generally agreed among legal scholars that Nepotism, for purposes of the law, refers to the hiring and advancement of un- or underqualified relatives simply by virtue of their relationship with an employee or officer. In other words, it’s only restricted if the person isn’t qualified for the position.

So, given how nepotism is viewed, and therefore could be expected to be argued in court, for the purpose of the law, they might have both been allowed since it was clear Bobby was qualified, and it was successfully argued that Clinton was as well, or at least it wasn’t successfully challenged. Furthermore, since she wasn’t paid, it must have been viewed as a moot point by the democrat majority House at the time.

It appears that Trump is doing everything legal and by the books, but if someone can logically and respectfully refute this, then by all mean please present your facts, links, and state the laws that actually prohibit what he is doing.

We need Trumps wife and daughter and son there to keep Trump from getting overzeleous and doing something dumb. The Liberal democrats are against this, they want trump to fail and make a mess of the whole country.

None of Donald Trump's close relatives, including brothers, sisters, half brothers, half sisters, step brothers, step sisters, step fathers, step mothers, uncles, aunts, first cousins, sons, daughters, step sons, step daughters, nieces, nephews, sons in law, daughters in law, fathers in law, mothers in law, can be appointed to Cabinet positions.

It it legal for him to appoint them as advisors, which are not limited in number and do not receive salary.

originally posted by: rickymouse
We need Trumps wife and daughter and son there to keep Trump from getting overzeleous and doing something dumb. The Liberal democrats are against this, they want trump to fail and make a mess of the whole country.

They don't "need," do to anything.

We (supposedly) live in a free democratic nation, not an oligarchy.

originally posted by: rickymouse
We need Trumps wife and daughter and son there to keep Trump from getting overzeleous and doing something dumb. The Liberal democrats are against this, they want trump to fail and make a mess of the whole country.

I agree that the Liberals have a different agenda for the country, like millions more refugees and other nonsense like that.
Say what you want about Trump's business empire, he has done pretty good for himself and his family.
I think he values his children's opinion but to think that they are the ones that run the show and keep him in check, is ridiculous.
Hey we all know that Trump is a shoot from the hip, loud mouth type of guy but there is no denying that he pretty much knows what he is doing from a business stand point.
If you take a look at his his kids lives, it looks like he did a pretty good job raising them.
There are plenty of examples of business tycoons kids going off the rails with drugs and things like that, but no evidence of his kids doing the same.
He doesn't need them to keep him in check.
And to address the OP, he cannot hire them for any position is his administration, that is why he is handing his company to them.

originally posted by: Realtruth
Is it illegal, or not?
///

It appears that Trump is doing everything legal and by the books, but if someone can logically and respectfully refute this, then by all mean please present your facts, links, and state the laws that actually prohibit what he is doing.

There's no such thing as illegal or legal.

People write laws with a certain "intent" in mind.

But since the architects of the law, are not allowed to interpret that law in application, the original "intent" may have nothing to do with the actual interpretation that follows.

This was deliberately done, to prevent tyrants from ruling.

The actions concerning law are separated, by the US Constitution, into three parts: The writer/maker of the law (Legislature), the interpreter of the law (Judiciary), and the executor of the law (Executive).

Since these three branches of government are all separate and independent, they each have their own view of the same law.

Each citizen, has to interpret the law, before he can follow that law. The average citizen has no real way of knowing if his interpretation of a particular law is correct, because the average citizen did not write the law. Moreover, the law is often deliberately written in a special legalize language that is obscure to the average citizen, so he cannot be expected to understand it. This forces the citizen to hire a person trained in that special language (the lawyer), who has a better chance in advising him, on what the law says and means. Most people do not hire lawyers to tell them what to do in their everyday activities, only for special situations.

Thus, the average person relies on his "perception of the law", derived from his own thinking, to guide his actions.

But, since the citizen didn't write the law, and cannot be expected to understand it, given the special nature of the language used, neither can the citizen know whether his actions are legal or illegal, nor can he be deemed to have done something legal or illegal, since it's unreasonable to expect anyone but a lawyer to know the details of the law.

Most people walk around doing things they think is legal or illegal, based on their "perception of the law", which may or may not have anything to do with any law that was written.

In fact, they will even judge others prematurely, as doing legal or illegal things, based on their own "perception", which, being untrained in the language of the law, is often incorrect on many fronts.

The way the system is set up, however, nobody is guilty of any violation of law, until a Court say so.

This doesn't stop people from "accusing others" of violations, and using their personal "perception of the law" to judge. But, until the court says so, that person is innocent.

Even after a court has determined that some individual did something "illegal", an appeal can be made to a higher court, and the lower court's ruling can be overturned.

So, even if a court says what you did was "illegal". That doesn't automatically make it so. Likewise, even if the court says your actions were "legal", it doesn't mean it is so. Another court can overturn that decision again.

The only court that can definitively determine whether someone did something wrong, is the Supreme Court.

And even that highest court of the land, can be wrong. It's decisions can be overturned by another session of the supreme court. Or, their could be a revolution, and "the people" can take back the powers of government, and change what is legal and illegal again.

So, the whole idea of "legal and illegal" is always in "flux".

It doesn't really exist.

It's a battle of minds and opinions.

originally posted by: RazorV66
Say what you want about Trump's business empire, he has done pretty good for himself and his family.

At a high cost to everyone else.
* stiffing contractors (and bragging about it)
* not paying taxes (which means you get to pay for upkeep of things he uses because he's keeping his money for himself)
* defaulting on loans (which costs banks and people who use banks money)

...etc.

In the old days, social pressure came down on the rich fat cats so that they did more for their cities and nations. That's why we have the Smithsonian, some of the large public libraries, foundations for the arts, public works, etc, etc. They gave back.

Trump just gives himself via charity Tim Teabow helmets and paintings of himself.

originally posted by: Byrd
Trump just gives himself via charity Tim Teabow helmets and paintings of himself.

Reminds me of Saddam Hussein. I fully expect to see giant statues of The Donald all across america, as we're driving down the highways. Roads named after Trump and his kin. A newly designed Currency with the $100,000 note depicting Donald Trump replacing Woodrow Wilson, or perhaps his image on the introduction, finally, of the $1,000,000 bill to mark the Trump era.

America has been Trump'ed !

There is no evidence Donald Trump ever bought a 6 foot painting of himself. If he did, he wouldn't need to use his foundation money. He has plenty of pocket money. Plus, his foundation is a private foundation, not a charity foundation like the Clinton foundation. His friends put money in his foundation. He can use it for whatever he wants.

Immigrants. He needs to hire lots of immigrants.