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.

 

‘Go buy Ivanka’s stuff,’ Kellyanne Conway said. Then Ivanka's fashion sales exploded

page: 7
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



Most of the sales came from online


LOL, they HAD to come from online, because hardly any retails stores are stocking her items. The ones that are have hidden her items, innocuously mixed in the racks.


edit on 12-3-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



It should also be noted that Kelly Anne Conway does not hold public office.


Yes she does.


PUBLIC OFFICE:
a position of authority or service involving responsibility to the public, especially within the government:
a job in the government that you have because you were chosen or elected


She was being interviewed in her official capacity from the White House when she made the offending comment.





She is neither in a position of authority or offering a service to the public.


She is Senior Adviser to Trump. That is a Federal Employee.

Now you're attempting to derail the actual concern (which is that she broke the law) to planting bogus seeds of doubt about her status as an actual employee. Stick with BRExit, something that likely is more apt to affect you than US politics.


Now have you explained the 'public office' part of the argument yet


As a government employee, she is bound by the OGE constraints, so, yes, I certainly have, many times over.



Ivanka walks away with bigger profits, Nothing happens to Conway, and you cry.


So then, you endorse breaking the law if it suits your particular lifestyle and argument to do so....then that explains quite a bit of why you're arguing so fervently with these concerns.


So at least we can agree that those in public office CAN endorse products as long as they do not use their public office to do so. Finally.



Actually, it's moot...she IS in public office 100% of the time so long as she continues to be President Trump's Senior adviser....if he fires her, then she can endorse away.



Endorse her actions? No.


If you want to talk about agreement, considering you do not condone her actions, then you agree she has broken the law. Finally.



So if she is a bar with her pal and says she likes BMW's or tells a girlfriend what her favourite perfume is, then she is breaking the law, right? You really think that?
edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
Lol, do you have any evidence of that?


You just aren't right somewhere, I'm not sure where it lies. But a person doesn't need "evidence" to support a personal opinion, which, in case you missed it, was prefaced with Personally


edit on 12-3-2017 by alphabetaone because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



Most of the sales came from online


LOL, they HAD to come from online, because hardly any retails stores are stocking her items. The ones that are have hidden her items, innocuously mixed in the racks.



Fortunately it didn't matter and she continues to win



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth
Lol, do you have any evidence of that?


You just aren't right somewhere, I'm not sure where it lies. But a person doesn't need "evidence" to support a personal opinion, which, in case you missed it, was prefaced with Personally



I didn't say he had to have evidence, I asked if he had any. I think you better look closer to home for the defects. Before you work on your comprehension skills, I'd try and sort out your fascination with non issues first... friendly advice.

edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

Aww. How sweet.

Takes money to make money. Takes a country to make more.

lol



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


5 CFR 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.


That was the entirety of my first post in this thread. No commentary whatsoever. You're the one that chose to ascribe extra meaning to it.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: UKTruth


5 CFR 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.


That was the entirety of my first post in this thread. No commentary whatsoever. You're the one that chose to ascribe extra meaning to it.


Which is why I asked why you care...you didn't answer.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



It should also be noted that Kelly Anne Conway does not hold public office.


Yes she does.


PUBLIC OFFICE:
a position of authority or service involving responsibility to the public, especially within the government:
a job in the government that you have because you were chosen or elected


She was being interviewed in her official capacity from the White House when she made the offending comment.





She is neither in a position of authority or offering a service to the public.


She is Senior Adviser to Trump. That is a Federal Employee.

Now you're attempting to derail the actual concern (which is that she broke the law) to planting bogus seeds of doubt about her status as an actual employee. Stick with BRExit, something that likely is more apt to affect you than US politics.


Now have you explained the 'public office' part of the argument yet


As a government employee, she is bound by the OGE constraints, so, yes, I certainly have, many times over.



Ivanka walks away with bigger profits, Nothing happens to Conway, and you cry.


So then, you endorse breaking the law if it suits your particular lifestyle and argument to do so....then that explains quite a bit of why you're arguing so fervently with these concerns.


So at least we can agree that those in public office CAN endorse products as long as they do not use their public office to do so. Finally.



Actually, it's moot...she IS in public office 100% of the time so long as she continues to be President Trump's Senior adviser....if he fires her, then she can endorse away.



Endorse her actions? No.


If you want to talk about agreement, considering you do not condone her actions, then you agree she has broken the law. Finally.



So if she is a bar with her pal and says she likes BMW's she is breaking the law, right? You really think that?


Nope. But she wasn't in a bar talking with her friends about what her opinions are on a product.

She was on national television being interviewed and told people to "Go out and buy"....that is an endorsement.

But I will entertain your drivel for the time being.

If you're going to cite, cite the whole thing, not just the parts you "want"



A prohibition against employees using public office for their own private gain for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom they are affiliated in a non-Government capacity, or for the endorsement or any product, service, or enterprise


By endorsing Ivanka's line and telling people to "Go out and buy", there was potential for Ivanka's personal gain based upon that....by telling her friends at a bar she likes BMW's there is no personal gain potential for anyone that she is affiliated with.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Retail sales always fall in February, after the Christmas rush and the January sales.

US retail sales dip in Feb

Given that factual retail trend, we can "assume" that the White House outcry for poor Ivanka's "unfair treatment" either swayed consumers to go out buy Ivanka's stuff, or Trump and friends bought up her products to artificially boost her profile.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: alphabetaone

Aww. How sweet.

Takes money to make money. Takes a country to make more.

lol



LOL. Indeed it does.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



It should also be noted that Kelly Anne Conway does not hold public office.


Yes she does.


PUBLIC OFFICE:
a position of authority or service involving responsibility to the public, especially within the government:
a job in the government that you have because you were chosen or elected


She was being interviewed in her official capacity from the White House when she made the offending comment.





She is neither in a position of authority or offering a service to the public.


She is Senior Adviser to Trump. That is a Federal Employee.

Now you're attempting to derail the actual concern (which is that she broke the law) to planting bogus seeds of doubt about her status as an actual employee. Stick with BRExit, something that likely is more apt to affect you than US politics.


Now have you explained the 'public office' part of the argument yet


As a government employee, she is bound by the OGE constraints, so, yes, I certainly have, many times over.



Ivanka walks away with bigger profits, Nothing happens to Conway, and you cry.


So then, you endorse breaking the law if it suits your particular lifestyle and argument to do so....then that explains quite a bit of why you're arguing so fervently with these concerns.


So at least we can agree that those in public office CAN endorse products as long as they do not use their public office to do so. Finally.



Actually, it's moot...she IS in public office 100% of the time so long as she continues to be President Trump's Senior adviser....if he fires her, then she can endorse away.



Endorse her actions? No.


If you want to talk about agreement, considering you do not condone her actions, then you agree she has broken the law. Finally.



So if she is a bar with her pal and says she likes BMW's she is breaking the law, right? You really think that?


Nope. But she wasn't in a bar talking with her friends about what her opinions are on a product.

She was on national television being interviewed and told people to "Go out and buy"....that is an endorsement.

But I will entertain your drivel for the time being.

If you're going to cite, cite the whole thing, not just the parts you "want"



A prohibition against employees using public office for their own private gain for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom they are affiliated in a non-Government capacity, or for the endorsement or any product, service, or enterprise


By endorsing Ivanka's line and telling people to "Go out and buy", there was potential for Ivanka's personal gain based upon that....by telling her friends at a bar she likes BMW's there is no personal gain potential for anyone that she is affiliated with.


It was you who dismissed another poster because they brought up the relevance of 'public office', now you are saying she can endorse a product as long as she is not using her public office. That's progress at least.

With that said, this is still an irrelevant issue, but it is funny that you are still pushing it. Does it upset you that much that Ivanka made money and Kelly Ann Conway was not punished?

edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth

Retail sales always fall in February, after the Christmas rush and the January sales.

US retail sales dip in Feb

Given that factual retail trend, we can "assume" that the White House outcry for poor Ivanka's "unfair treatment" either swayed consumers to go out buy Ivanka's stuff, or Trump and friends bought up her products to artificially boost her profile.





Yes, they are certainly two assumptions. The likely one is that she got the support of normal people, the unlikely one is the liberal 'comfort blanket' assumption.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



It should also be noted that Kelly Anne Conway does not hold public office.


Yes she does.


PUBLIC OFFICE:
a position of authority or service involving responsibility to the public, especially within the government:
a job in the government that you have because you were chosen or elected


She was being interviewed in her official capacity from the White House when she made the offending comment.





She is neither in a position of authority or offering a service to the public.


She is Senior Adviser to Trump. That is a Federal Employee.

Now you're attempting to derail the actual concern (which is that she broke the law) to planting bogus seeds of doubt about her status as an actual employee. Stick with BRExit, something that likely is more apt to affect you than US politics.


Now have you explained the 'public office' part of the argument yet


As a government employee, she is bound by the OGE constraints, so, yes, I certainly have, many times over.



Ivanka walks away with bigger profits, Nothing happens to Conway, and you cry.


So then, you endorse breaking the law if it suits your particular lifestyle and argument to do so....then that explains quite a bit of why you're arguing so fervently with these concerns.


So at least we can agree that those in public office CAN endorse products as long as they do not use their public office to do so. Finally.



Actually, it's moot...she IS in public office 100% of the time so long as she continues to be President Trump's Senior adviser....if he fires her, then she can endorse away.



Endorse her actions? No.


If you want to talk about agreement, considering you do not condone her actions, then you agree she has broken the law. Finally.



So if she is a bar with her pal and says she likes BMW's she is breaking the law, right? You really think that?


Nope. But she wasn't in a bar talking with her friends about what her opinions are on a product.

She was on national television being interviewed and told people to "Go out and buy"....that is an endorsement.

But I will entertain your drivel for the time being.

If you're going to cite, cite the whole thing, not just the parts you "want"



A prohibition against employees using public office for their own private gain for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom they are affiliated in a non-Government capacity, or for the endorsement or any product, service, or enterprise


By endorsing Ivanka's line and telling people to "Go out and buy", there was potential for Ivanka's personal gain based upon that....by telling her friends at a bar she likes BMW's there is no personal gain potential for anyone that she is affiliated with.


It was you who dismissed another poster because they brought up the relevance of 'public office', now you are saying she can endorse a product as long as she is not using her public office. That's progress at least.

With that said, this is still an irrelevant issue, but it is funny that you are still pushing it. Does it upset you that much that Ivanka made money and Kelly Ann Conway was not punished?


I never dismissed ANYTHING about public office, what I dismissed was the irrelevant 'private gain' that he was harping upon. Stop attempting dereailment...it's not working and you wont 'win the internetz'....

Conway endorsed a product.
Conway is Senior Adviser to Trump which makes
Conway a Federal Employee
Conway broke the law.

All your spin and hyperbole in the world can't change that fact.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



It should also be noted that Kelly Anne Conway does not hold public office.


Yes she does.


PUBLIC OFFICE:
a position of authority or service involving responsibility to the public, especially within the government:
a job in the government that you have because you were chosen or elected


She was being interviewed in her official capacity from the White House when she made the offending comment.





She is neither in a position of authority or offering a service to the public.


She is Senior Adviser to Trump. That is a Federal Employee.

Now you're attempting to derail the actual concern (which is that she broke the law) to planting bogus seeds of doubt about her status as an actual employee. Stick with BRExit, something that likely is more apt to affect you than US politics.


Now have you explained the 'public office' part of the argument yet


As a government employee, she is bound by the OGE constraints, so, yes, I certainly have, many times over.



Ivanka walks away with bigger profits, Nothing happens to Conway, and you cry.


So then, you endorse breaking the law if it suits your particular lifestyle and argument to do so....then that explains quite a bit of why you're arguing so fervently with these concerns.


So at least we can agree that those in public office CAN endorse products as long as they do not use their public office to do so. Finally.



Actually, it's moot...she IS in public office 100% of the time so long as she continues to be President Trump's Senior adviser....if he fires her, then she can endorse away.



Endorse her actions? No.


If you want to talk about agreement, considering you do not condone her actions, then you agree she has broken the law. Finally.



So if she is a bar with her pal and says she likes BMW's she is breaking the law, right? You really think that?


Nope. But she wasn't in a bar talking with her friends about what her opinions are on a product.

She was on national television being interviewed and told people to "Go out and buy"....that is an endorsement.

But I will entertain your drivel for the time being.

If you're going to cite, cite the whole thing, not just the parts you "want"



A prohibition against employees using public office for their own private gain for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom they are affiliated in a non-Government capacity, or for the endorsement or any product, service, or enterprise


By endorsing Ivanka's line and telling people to "Go out and buy", there was potential for Ivanka's personal gain based upon that....by telling her friends at a bar she likes BMW's there is no personal gain potential for anyone that she is affiliated with.


It was you who dismissed another poster because they brought up the relevance of 'public office', now you are saying she can endorse a product as long as she is not using her public office. That's progress at least.

With that said, this is still an irrelevant issue, but it is funny that you are still pushing it. Does it upset you that much that Ivanka made money and Kelly Ann Conway was not punished?


I never dismissed ANYTHING about public office, what I dismissed was the irrelevant 'private gain' that he was harping upon. Stop attempting dereailment...it's not working and you wont 'win the internetz'....

Conway endorsed a product.
Conway is Senior Adviser to Trump which makes
Conway a Federal Employee
Conway broke the law.

All your spin and hyperbole in the world can't change that fact.


Nope.

You were asked this:



how was ms conways statement " using public office " ?


to which you replied:



Not applicable to the concerns at hand. Move along.


All very clear. No spin or hyperbole required.

edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



The likely one is that she got the support of normal people


Normal people don't have extra money to spend on non-essential retail items in February. They're paying off their holiday debt. That's why, across the board, retail sales always fall in February.

Her sales were tanking during the holidays and January sales, when normal people spend their money, which is why her products were pulled. So no it's not likely.


edit on 12-3-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



The likely one is that she got the support of normal people


Normal people don't have extra money to spend on non-essential retail items in February. They're paying off their holiday debt. That's why, across the board, retail sales always fall in February.

Her sales were tanking during the holidays and January sales, when normal people spend their money, which is why her products were pulled. So no it's not likely.



Yes retail sales do fall off, but normal people do shop in February you know. Amazing but true. I can understand why you would need to support your fantasy by pretending that everything just stops for everyone, though. Back to reality, just think of all those normal people taking a stand against the crazies trying to attack a person because of politics, switching their spend to Ivanka products. Warms the heart

edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



It should also be noted that Kelly Anne Conway does not hold public office.


Yes she does.


PUBLIC OFFICE:
a position of authority or service involving responsibility to the public, especially within the government:
a job in the government that you have because you were chosen or elected


She was being interviewed in her official capacity from the White House when she made the offending comment.





She is neither in a position of authority or offering a service to the public.


She is Senior Adviser to Trump. That is a Federal Employee.

Now you're attempting to derail the actual concern (which is that she broke the law) to planting bogus seeds of doubt about her status as an actual employee. Stick with BRExit, something that likely is more apt to affect you than US politics.


Now have you explained the 'public office' part of the argument yet


As a government employee, she is bound by the OGE constraints, so, yes, I certainly have, many times over.



Ivanka walks away with bigger profits, Nothing happens to Conway, and you cry.


So then, you endorse breaking the law if it suits your particular lifestyle and argument to do so....then that explains quite a bit of why you're arguing so fervently with these concerns.


So at least we can agree that those in public office CAN endorse products as long as they do not use their public office to do so. Finally.



Actually, it's moot...she IS in public office 100% of the time so long as she continues to be President Trump's Senior adviser....if he fires her, then she can endorse away.



Endorse her actions? No.


If you want to talk about agreement, considering you do not condone her actions, then you agree she has broken the law. Finally.



So if she is a bar with her pal and says she likes BMW's she is breaking the law, right? You really think that?


Nope. But she wasn't in a bar talking with her friends about what her opinions are on a product.

She was on national television being interviewed and told people to "Go out and buy"....that is an endorsement.

But I will entertain your drivel for the time being.

If you're going to cite, cite the whole thing, not just the parts you "want"



A prohibition against employees using public office for their own private gain for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom they are affiliated in a non-Government capacity, or for the endorsement or any product, service, or enterprise


By endorsing Ivanka's line and telling people to "Go out and buy", there was potential for Ivanka's personal gain based upon that....by telling her friends at a bar she likes BMW's there is no personal gain potential for anyone that she is affiliated with.


It was you who dismissed another poster because they brought up the relevance of 'public office', now you are saying she can endorse a product as long as she is not using her public office. That's progress at least.

With that said, this is still an irrelevant issue, but it is funny that you are still pushing it. Does it upset you that much that Ivanka made money and Kelly Ann Conway was not punished?


I never dismissed ANYTHING about public office, what I dismissed was the irrelevant 'private gain' that he was harping upon. Stop attempting dereailment...it's not working and you wont 'win the internetz'....

Conway endorsed a product.
Conway is Senior Adviser to Trump which makes
Conway a Federal Employee
Conway broke the law.

All your spin and hyperbole in the world can't change that fact.


Nope.

You were asked this:



how was ms conways statement " using public office " ?


to which you replied:



Not applicable to the concerns at hand. Move along.


All very clear. No spin or hyperbole required.


Of course it wasn't relevant, a question that states "how was ms Conway using public office" is an irrelevant question in the first place. As a Federal employee being interviewed on national television in the capacity of Senior Adviser to the President it can only be under the auspice of 'using public office'.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth



It should also be noted that Kelly Anne Conway does not hold public office.


Yes she does.


PUBLIC OFFICE:
a position of authority or service involving responsibility to the public, especially within the government:
a job in the government that you have because you were chosen or elected


She was being interviewed in her official capacity from the White House when she made the offending comment.





She is neither in a position of authority or offering a service to the public.


She is Senior Adviser to Trump. That is a Federal Employee.

Now you're attempting to derail the actual concern (which is that she broke the law) to planting bogus seeds of doubt about her status as an actual employee. Stick with BRExit, something that likely is more apt to affect you than US politics.


Now have you explained the 'public office' part of the argument yet


As a government employee, she is bound by the OGE constraints, so, yes, I certainly have, many times over.



Ivanka walks away with bigger profits, Nothing happens to Conway, and you cry.


So then, you endorse breaking the law if it suits your particular lifestyle and argument to do so....then that explains quite a bit of why you're arguing so fervently with these concerns.


So at least we can agree that those in public office CAN endorse products as long as they do not use their public office to do so. Finally.



Actually, it's moot...she IS in public office 100% of the time so long as she continues to be President Trump's Senior adviser....if he fires her, then she can endorse away.



Endorse her actions? No.


If you want to talk about agreement, considering you do not condone her actions, then you agree she has broken the law. Finally.



So if she is a bar with her pal and says she likes BMW's she is breaking the law, right? You really think that?


Nope. But she wasn't in a bar talking with her friends about what her opinions are on a product.

She was on national television being interviewed and told people to "Go out and buy"....that is an endorsement.

But I will entertain your drivel for the time being.

If you're going to cite, cite the whole thing, not just the parts you "want"



A prohibition against employees using public office for their own private gain for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom they are affiliated in a non-Government capacity, or for the endorsement or any product, service, or enterprise


By endorsing Ivanka's line and telling people to "Go out and buy", there was potential for Ivanka's personal gain based upon that....by telling her friends at a bar she likes BMW's there is no personal gain potential for anyone that she is affiliated with.


It was you who dismissed another poster because they brought up the relevance of 'public office', now you are saying she can endorse a product as long as she is not using her public office. That's progress at least.

With that said, this is still an irrelevant issue, but it is funny that you are still pushing it. Does it upset you that much that Ivanka made money and Kelly Ann Conway was not punished?


I never dismissed ANYTHING about public office, what I dismissed was the irrelevant 'private gain' that he was harping upon. Stop attempting dereailment...it's not working and you wont 'win the internetz'....

Conway endorsed a product.
Conway is Senior Adviser to Trump which makes
Conway a Federal Employee
Conway broke the law.

All your spin and hyperbole in the world can't change that fact.


Nope.

You were asked this:



how was ms conways statement " using public office " ?


to which you replied:



Not applicable to the concerns at hand. Move along.


All very clear. No spin or hyperbole required.


Of course it wasn't relevant, a question that states "how was ms Conway using public office" is an irrelevant question in the first place. As a Federal employee being interviewed on national television in the capacity of Senior Adviser to the President it can only be under the auspice of 'using public office'.


Earlier on you said you were replying to a question about 'personal gain'. So now we know you were not, the response changes? OK. You make it up as you go along.

edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

While I don't believe that for a minute, if that is the case, then it was the illegal outcry and advertisement from the President and his advisor, Kellyanne, that swayed the market, and violated the law and ethics rules and can be added to the list of that many 'abuse of power' accusations accumulating against this administration.

Impeachment looms!


edit on 12-3-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join