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.

 

After Trump tweet, ethics office to U.S. employees: do not endorse products

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Gothmog

Well, the president IS part of the executive branch. You think the boss shouldn't have to abide by the same ethics guidelines as his employees? How Kim Jong-Un of you.


Quite clearly he can change them, so no matter how much it upsets you, NO he doesn't have to abide by the same rules.
In reality though it's more than likely that the rules will be interpreted fairly and according to the situation as they are not laws for the most part.
So, tweeting about LL Bean is unlikely to make your President nervous that he's acting like Kim Jong-Un.
Generally speaking when a person starts equating a fairly innocuous tweet to a mass murdering dictator, rational human beings will ignore them and just assume their mind is still clouded and their judgement compromised by hatred.
edit on 14/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:46 AM
link   
As an American citizen, the POTUS has the right to endorse whoever whatever he likes. He can say his daughter is hot and that's nobody's business.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:46 AM
link   
The POTUS is a public servant just like a police officer or a teacher or a firefighter or an intelligence agent or a nurse or a doctor or a mailman. He has the same rights and freedoms as any other public servant.
edit on 14-1-2017 by DJT45 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog



All executive branch employees must refrain from misuse of position, including endorsements."

Ya think the President of the US is an Executive Branch Employee ?


What is he then? Dictator?

Yes....the president is an employee. He is employed by the people.

Not a f$cking dictator.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Gothmog

Well, the president IS part of the executive branch. You think the boss shouldn't have to abide by the same ethics guidelines as his employees? How Kim Jong-Un of you.

Well , I guess I have "rooted out" the foreign nationals
The President - Elected official
Congress - Elected officials
Supreme Court - Appointed Officials
Cabinet of the President - Appointed officials
Not a single solitary "employee" amongst the entire group



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

They are all government employees who are paid with salaries. The president's advisors are not since they are not paid with salaries.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJT45
a reply to: Gothmog

They are all government employees who are paid with salaries. The president's advisors are not since they are not paid with salaries.

Yeah Security , Janitorial , etc, But none of the ones I mentioned. Period.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

If the president is not an employee he is not my president then.....



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlbanArthur
a reply to: Gothmog

If the president is not an employee he is not my president then.....

He is not. Then he probably isnt you President . Neither would Obama or any President going back to Washington (actually Washington was appointed kinda sorta against his will)



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

I am sure Trump will be pleased to know there are no ethics he has to follow as President of the United States.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Gothmog

I am sure Trump will be pleased to know there are no ethics he has to follow as President of the United States.


Of course there are. You seem to be very emotional about this subject. why?
If he proves unethical, in the judgement of many (not the few and certainly not just bias people), the House can impeach him with a simple majority.
There are plenty of safe guards in the system, but you seem to want to get upset about some notion of dictatorships.

I can tell you though, it's unlikely a tweet about LL Bean is going to land him in the dock.

edit on 14/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Gothmog

I am sure Trump will be pleased to know there are no ethics he has to follow as President of the United States.

You didnt read the OP did you ?



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

I never said he would be impeached for promoting a specific product. Unethical doesn't necessarily mean impeachable. What Clinton did with Monica was unethical, but he wasn't impeached for having an affair.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Don't see anything in the Constitution disallowing the President from mentioning his favorite brand.

It ain't found in there that the President forfeits free speech, either. He represents the People. Shoot, he was helping people with less than 140 characters!

When's the last time you heard a President do that??

Watchdogs have owners. Those owners must be routed out.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: TarzanBeta

There is nothing in the Constitution disallowing a president from having an affair with his intern either - doesn't mean it's not unethical.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: TarzanBeta

There is nothing in the Constitution disallowing a president from having an affair with his intern either - doesn't mean it's not unethical.


I didn't elect a professor of ethics. I elected a businessman.

Questions?



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Profusion



NOBODY... is "too big to fail"!!!

NOBODY!!!



I don't know about that. Some companies simply have too big a market impact, and will set our national infrastructure in that area back 100 years if they fail.

Recognizing that some companies are too big to fail is a good thing, because it's the perfect justification to go in and break them up so that they're not too big to fail.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: TarzanBeta

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: TarzanBeta

There is nothing in the Constitution disallowing a president from having an affair with his intern either - doesn't mean it's not unethical.


I didn't elect a professor of ethics. I elected a businessman.

Questions?


An unethical businessman.

No questions necessary.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: TarzanBeta

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: TarzanBeta

There is nothing in the Constitution disallowing a president from having an affair with his intern either - doesn't mean it's not unethical.


I didn't elect a professor of ethics. I elected a businessman.

Questions?


An unethical businessman.

No questions necessary.


Nice. I've never met an ethical businessman or woman. "In the market of competitive commerce", it takes people who are willing to act to get things done. If it's not illegal or unlawful, it's fair game. I prefer the strategy that does no harm, but in competition, somebody loses, and nobody wins all the time.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   
making a law that forces everyone to buy a particular service or product seems like the ultimate way for government employees to endorse a product, yes I`m talking about obamacare.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join