Active Now

my2cents
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Per a Justice Department January memo , anti-nepotism laws DO NOT APPLY TO THE WHITEHOUSE! So the Prez IS ABOVE THE LAW ISN'T HE?

Per a Justice Department January memo , anti-nepotism laws DO NOT APPLY TO THE WHITEHOUSE! So the Prez IS ABOVE THE LAW ISN'T HE?

Posted - April 2, 2017

Responses


  • This has been going on for a very long time. Plus Ivanka will not be getting a salary. 

    https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/presidential-nepotism-debate-goes-back-to-the-founders-time/
      April 2, 2017 8:37 AM MDT
    4

  • 113301
    I read that Jared won't either. I don't see what difference that makes Karen. She is assistant to the president (I wonder how many of those he has?) and he is a senior adviser (I wonder how many of those Trump has). Nepotism is nepotism, paid for or not. They both have a great deal of influence on him. Thank you for your reply Karen and Happy Monday! :)
      April 3, 2017 7:09 AM MDT
    1

  • Quite a few of our past presidents have had family members working for/with them. This is nothing new and will probably continue with future presidents. 
      April 3, 2017 9:41 AM MDT
    0

  • 113301
    Then you should be pleased to know that Trump just gave Eric's wife Laura a job in his administration. Thank you for your reply Karen and Happy Tuesday! :)
      April 4, 2017 4:22 AM MDT
    0

  • "On Wednesday, the AP reported that Lara had been hired as a senior consultant for Giles-Parscale, the digital vendor for her father-in-law's political campaign. She will reportedly serve as a liaison from the company to Trump's ongoing campaign."

    It neither pleases nor displeases me. If someone is qualified to do a job, I don't really care who they are related to.  This was from last year, I cannot find anything else about her having any other job with Trump's administration. 

    John F. Kennedy

    One of the most famous instances of presidential nepotism is one that few people have a problem with in retrospect. Robert F. Kennedy was a beloved attorney general, remembered as a champion of civil rights, but he was also appointed by his brother John F. Kennedy. RFK pushed JFK left on a number of issues, especially civil rights and fighting organized crime during his tenure. RFK is remembered so fondly as a progressive leader today that it is easy to forget that he had little legal experience, and lacked the resume of a typical AG candidate, when originally appointed. Journalists of the day were not so positive about the young AG. Journalist Anthony Lewis recalled, “His experience was zero. He'd been a lawyer for Senate committees, a zealot with no understanding of the terrible responsibilities of an attorney general. I was appalled. I thought it was a simply awful idea.” Luckily, RFK proved him wrong.

    John Adams

    Our third president was one of the most nepotistic in American political history. He appointed his son Prussian diplomat in a move that would start Quincy on the track to become president. While the appointment was met with resistance, it was nothing compared to his attempt to land a government job for his son-in-law William Stephens Smith, a known land speculator. After trying and failing to land Smith several government positions, Adams got him a job as a customs agent. Adams also secured cushy gigs for his brother-in-law as a postmaster and for Quincy’s father-in-law as the “superintendent of stamps.”

    Nepotism was common in the early days of the Republic: Zachary Taylor, James Monroe, John Tyler, and James Buchanan all hired family members, generally in secretarial roles. Not only did Andrew Jackson hire family members, but he is remembered for the “spoils system,” which made an art out of granting positions to supporters and their family members.

    Ulysses S. Grant

    If you're familiar with Grant’s Presidency, you're familiar with the many scandals that engulfed his administration. Whether you view Grant as a decent man who got in over his head or as a corrupt and weak president given a political hall pass due to his effective performance in the Civil War, you can't argue with the fact that was one of the most aggressively nepotistic presidents in US history. Grant appointed his cousin Silas Hudson minister to Guatemala. His brother-in-law M.J. Cramer was appointed consulate in Leipzig. His brother-in-law James F. Casey was given a customs job in New Orleans. Another brother-in-law, Frederick Dent, was handed a gig as White House usher. All told, 40 relatives benefited from Grant’s dotage, contributing to the web of scandal that engulfed his presidency.

    Woodrow Wilson

    When William Gibbs McAdoo was appointed secretary of the treasury and chairman of the fed, he was not a part of Wilson’s family. However, after marrying Wilson’s daughter he declined to step down. Wilson later appointed McAdoo chairman of the War Finance Board after the outbreak of World War I.

    Franklin Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower

    Both Roosevelt and Eisenhower appointed their sons to administrative positions. FDR placed  his son James in a secretarial position while Eisenhower gave his son John an assistant staff secretary position. Roosevelt later expanded James’ responsibilities to include coordinating eighteen different White House agencies, making him an integral part of day to day Oval Office operations. Though John held no other positions in his father’s administration beyond his secretarial post, this first job proved to be a stepping stone. He would go on to work in both the Nixon and Ford administrations.

    This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at April 4, 2017 4:56 AM MDT
      April 4, 2017 4:47 AM MDT
    2

  • 113301
    I heard about it yesterday Karen. I assumed it meant it just was happening. I did no research. Thank you for the info. You don't care who is related to whom. That's fine for you. It doesn't work for me at all. Different strokes! :)
      April 4, 2017 4:51 AM MDT
    1

  • Please see what I just added to my above comment. THIS IS NOTHING NEW!! 
    I'm not going to cry foul over everything little thing Trump does. We all know you hate the man, but saying everything he does is BAD BAD BAD is just wrong. Maybe save the criticism for when he actually does do something. Giving family members a job in his administration is not something new that he just came up with. It's not something I care to get upset and cry about. He seems to be doing a lot of good, why isn't this mentioned?

     

    Despite all the hysteria you’re seeing from the Left, the mainstream media and from some Republicans who still at this late date can’t get over the fact that he won the primaries, Trump has actually had a dynamite first month in office. Trump may not fare so well if you judge him on his tweeting habits or his willingness to play nice with the media, but the agenda he’s pursued has been a conservative dream.

    While I’m sure you’ve heard plenty of stories based on anonymous leaks and wild speculation, how many people have taken stock of what Trump’s actually been doing? Not what he’s tweeting, not what he might do some day, but what he’s actually done. There may be a lot more that needs doing, but if you’re a conservative, the proper reaction to his agenda is “so far, so good.”

    10) Freezing all Federal Hiring Outside of the Military: Trump followed in Ronald Reagan’s footsteps by putting a federal hiring freeze in place almost immediately after he became president. That’s big, because the first step to shrinking government is to stop adding more people to it.

    9) Pulling Support for the Obama Drive to Force Women to Allow Men in Their Bathrooms: This was a bit surprising, because Trump has generally been supportive of allowing transgender women to use women’s bathrooms, but he also said he believes the issue should be left to the states. Towards that end, he ordered the DOJ to “withdraw a motion filed by former President Barack Obama seeking to allow transgender students in public schools to use the restroom with which they identify.” That will probably lead to the issue being left to the states, which is how it should be.

    8) Reinstating The Mexico City Policy: Barring U.S. government funding to international non-governmental agencies that promote or perform abortions is a big deal for pro-lifers. Because of Trump, your tax dollars are no longer going to be used to murder children overseas.

    7) Ordered Federal Agencies To Cut Two Regulations For Every New One They Propose: Not only will this lead to fewer regulations, Trump has also decreed that the net cost of any new regulation that is added after cutting the old regulations should be zero. In other words, the regulatory burden on the American people can only go in one direction: down. If you want to help the economy, one of the best ways to do it is to stop strangling American businesses with red tape. Trump understands that.

    6) Putting Out An Executive Order Asking The DOJ And Homeland Security to Withhold “Federal Funds, Except As Mandated By Law” From Sanctuary Cities: Trump talked a lot about sanctuary cities on the campaign trail and it’s great to see him taking action against these lawless cities. The fewer sanctuary cities we have, the fewer Americans like Kate Steinle will be raped, robbed or murdered as a result. There is no such thing as the “rule of law” when a protected class of foreign trespassers don’t live under the same laws as the rest of us.

     

    5) Approving The Dakota Access Pipeline And The Keystone Pipeline: Not only will both those pipelines produce jobs without harming the environment, over the long haul they’ll help reduce gas prices. Liberals may not care about Americans spending less on gas, but it’s great that Trump does.

    4) Killing The Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal: As Jeff Sessions has noted, the TPP was a bad agreement that dangerously eroded America sovereignty,

    "The TPP is about a goal of creating a new global regulatory structure, what I have called a Pacific union, transferring power from individual Americans and power from Congress once more. Eroding Congress to an unaccountable, unelected international bureaucratic committee. In other words, we are empowering the Trans-Pacific Partnership countries to create really a new Congress of sorts, a group with delegates that goes and meets and decides important issues that can impact everyday life of Americans. So the American representative in this commission, which will operate in many ways like the UN, will not be answerable to voters anywhere."

     

    For liberals, transferring American sovereignty to an unelected international group is a feature. It’s great that Trump sees it as a bug.

    3) Undermining Obamacare: While there’s still lots of talk about how the GOP should repeal and replace Obamacare, Trump has already stuck a shiv in the heart of the program by ordering the government to “exercise all authority and discretion available to them” to delay the law and grant exemptions. There are still legal questions to be answered about the long term impact of this executive order, but as a practical matter, it appears to have already done away with the IRS enforcing a penalty on people who don’t have healthcare. Technically, the law is still on the books, but if you no longer have to report to the IRS whether you have health insurance or not, that makes it nearly impossible for  it to be enforced. Obamacare is already in a death spiral and this executive order will speed things along.

     

    2) Ordering The Construction Of The Border Wall: If you had to pick a central promise of Trump’s campaign, it was building a border wall. He’s already ordered construction to begin and as an extra added bonus, he signed an executive order increasing the number of border patrol agents and staffers for deportations. Of course ultimately, Trump will be judged on getting the wall finished, but you have to start somewhere and it’s good to see him taking that big first step right out of the gate.

    1) Selecting Neil Gorsuch For The Supreme Court: Gorsuch is an eminently qualified 49 year old originalist and if conservatives were fantasy league picking their top five selections for the court, he’d be on it. Trump did his job; now it’s up to Mitch McConnell to get Gorsuch confirmed via hook, crook or nuclear option.

     
     
     
     
      April 4, 2017 4:59 AM MDT
    1

  • 22891
    sounds like it
      April 2, 2017 4:31 PM MDT
    0

  • 35606
    It does indeed apply to the President, however the solution mentioned in the law is that the "relative" appointed may not be paid out of the US Treasury.

    (c)
    An individual appointed, employed, promoted, or advanced in violation of this section is not entitled to pay, and money may not be paid from the Treasury as pay to an individual so appointed, employed, promoted, or advanced.


    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3110

    So as long as they are not being paid...it is all good.
      April 3, 2017 3:56 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    I dunno m2c. Maybe it's all legal but honestly the power that is being handed to Ivanka and Jared is getting scary. I just heard yesterday that Eric's wife Laura is also being given a job in the administration. I don't know if she is being paid. But at that rate Trump will have every member of his family in government. SIGH. It stinks to high heaven as far as I'm concerned. Thank you for your thoughtful, helpful and informative reply and the link. I appreciate it. Does this not worry you at all? Just between thee and me? Happy Tuesday to thee!  :)
      April 4, 2017 4:21 AM MDT
    1

  • 35606
    No it doesn't worry me. A President needs people who he/she can trust. Trust not to leak information, trust to give good advice and trust to stand up and tell them when they are wrong, not just "yes men" who better than family most of the time.
      April 4, 2017 4:39 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Thank you for your reply m2c. What DOES worry you? Why?
      April 4, 2017 4:40 AM MDT
    0

  • 35606
    Our jobs leaving the country worries me. 
      April 4, 2017 4:55 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    You know that automation and robotics are among the reasons for people losing jobs don't you m2c? Trump NEVER ONCE has discussed that. People need to be retrained to do jobs that robots/automation cannot do. Also promising jobs to coal miners ws foolish. Even the head of some union said that? If the coal mine companies go out of business there are no jobs. If the market for coal is dwindling due to natural gas/solar power etcetera competition replacing it what is the point? It is a market-driven economy m2c. Supply and demand. If there is no demand for a product it doesn't matter how much supply you have. You will fail. You can't stop progress. I mean people who earned a living making buggies for the horse-and-buggy society had to find other ways to earn a living when automobiles came on the scene. It is the same for coal. Cleaner safer healthier power is displacing it. Miners died of lung disease. Remember they would take canaries down with them in the coal mines and if the canary died they got out of there because the air was lethal. Also the mine cave-ins took lives if lung disease didn't. Going back to what was doesn't work because what was is no longer viable. There will be new jobs in the future to coincide with the new demands. Jobs can be created IMMEDIATELY if Congress votes billions of dollars for infrastructure repair. I don't know how many but surely thousands and thousands  of people will be needed RIGHT NOW because the United States is in dangerous disrepair.  Bridges and roads are getting dangerous. Why can't we start there? What's holding things up? :)
      April 4, 2017 5:04 AM MDT
    0

  • 35606
    No that is just the new excuse. 

    NAFTA, EPA, Currency manipulation, unions and other trade deals are why jobs left. 
      April 4, 2017 5:09 AM MDT
    0

  • 113301
    You really believe that m2c? Have you done any research on how automation and replacement of humans by robots is occuring and will increase over time? If not I suggest you do. Just Google "how many jobs will be done by robots in the futre" or something like that. You cannot close your eyes to reality. Cars are being put together by assemblies consisting of robots and have been for years. Mechanization is not new. It is increasing. Robots are becoming more sophisticated and capable of performoing operations. Seriously. You know you like to look things up. If you want to get at the truth please do that. Because what you are attributing loss of jobs too isn't the whole picture. I'm not lying to you  m2c. Something like 50% of certain jobs will be performed by robots in some industries within a few years. Jobs humans used to do.
      April 4, 2017 5:13 AM MDT
    1

  • 35606
    Yes I believe it. I know plenty of people who lost their jobs and it was not because a robot took it. It was because the job went to Mexico. My home town is full of factories that are empty because the jobs went to Mexico. No automation. 
    I don't care if we have self checkout at stores or touch ordering at restaurants....Those are not the jobs I am talking about, those are the jobs the people got stuck with when the good job went to Mexico.
      April 4, 2017 5:19 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    In other words you refuse to do any research on robots/automatiion. Okay. I shall not discuss it with you again m2c. You are not receptive so I will save my breath. Jobs went away because the owners wanted CHEAP LABOR so they could increase their bottom line. Whose fault is that? Greed has no limits. Do you buy only American-made products or do you buy products from other countries? Ivanka Trump has her clothes made outside the country. Why? Because she l ikes CHEAP LABOR. Do you disagree with that too?
      April 4, 2017 5:42 AM MDT
    0

  • 35606
    Obviously I agree labor price has to do with it....I mentioned Unions as part of the reason jobs left. It also has to do with currency manipulation...That is why the labor is so much cheaper in some countries. 
      April 4, 2017 5:48 AM MDT
    0