Ivanka is the wild card of the Trump presidency

[jimnyc]

Always loved Ivanka, because she's hot as hell! :) But also because she's smart as hell in addition.

-----

Ivanka is the wild card of the Trump presidency

It only makes sense that such an unprecedented president-elect should have an unprecedented First Daughter. And to Donald Trump, Ivanka has long been first among equals.

Of his five children, she is peerless. During a family interview with Barbara Walters last year, Eric, Donald Jr. and Tiffany Trump all said Ivanka, 35, is their father’s favorite. When asked, years ago, how he ranked Ivanka and his other daughter Tiffany, Trump said there was no contest.

“Come on!” he said. “Daddy’s little girl!”

While the media has, as it should, assiduously reported on every official Cabinet appointment made by President-elect Trump, they have yet to vet the next administration’s most significant, powerful player: Ivanka. She’s not the first woman to sub for a first lady — most notably, Teddy Roosevelt’s daughter Alice did — but none had the influence Ivanka likely will.

Forget adviser: Ivanka, now moving her family to DC, may be co-president.

“The only phone call Donald would always take,” a Trump insider told Politico last July, “was Ivanka.”

Last week, Trump’s team floated Ivanka as inhabitant of the First Lady’s office in the East Wing. Ivanka also began personally lobbying Congress on child-care legislation.

Even if Trump’s wife, Melania, hadn’t announced that she’d be staying behind in New York City to see their 10-year-old son, Barron, through the end of the school year, the campaign itself proved that Ivanka’s opinions and advice, her branding and image, were prized most highly by Donald.

Rest here - http://nypost.com/2016/12/17/ivanka-is-the-wild-card-of-the-trump-presidency/

[Elessar]

Well...she is a doll.

Sharp as a whip, too.

[Abbey Marie]

She strikes me as a bit liberal, so I'm not thrilled. She is definitely gorgeous.

[fj1200]

1992 called. It wants its meme back.


... 'and you get two for the price of one'.

[revelarts]

I didn't like it when Hillary was put front in the Clinton white house With Hillary Care and more. And I'm not excited about Ivanka riding the coat tails of her father into creating policies and agendas for the country. I didn't vote for Trump but i sure didn't vote for Ivanka, no one did.

As a nice looking woman she gets my vote. but that doesn't mean i want her fiddling with the gov't just cause Daddy said she could.

the whole American Dynasty/Nepotism thing is really starting to bug me.

[Abbey Marie]

I tend to agree, Rev, on this one. But even if it is little consolation to you, I think Donald is a strong man, and will do what he wants to, even if Ivanka has other ideas.

[jimnyc]

I didn't like it when Hillary was put front in the Clinton white house With Hillary Care and more. And I'm not excited about Ivanka riding the coat tails of her father into creating policies and agendas for the country. I didn't vote for Trump but i sure didn't vote for Ivanka, no one did.

As a nice looking woman she gets my vote. but that doesn't mean i want her fiddling with the gov't just cause Daddy said she could.

the whole American Dynasty/Nepotism thing is really starting to bug me.

I'm sure you aren't thrilled with the 4,000 people he hires. Nor the amount of people that will be directly advising him. If not her it will be someone else. But since it's her, I say good choice, she's extremely smart and anything she works on will benefit from it.

With that said, I've yet to see anything at all that was given to her. Trump already stated he would have to check with his counsel to even see if she can work in certain areas. In other words, he wants to do it the right and legal way.

Not sure where you got this whole American dynasty thing from, so I won't comment. More than likely involvement from his family, and someone jumping and making such an erroneous conclusion.

[jimnyc]

We have anti-nepotism laws on the books. I'm sure this year more than any other year in existence, there will be folks watching and making sure Trump doesn't run afoul. If he goes too far, there are some waiting to pounce already. I don't think it's going to be an issue. But I'll be thrilled for as much as she'll legally be allowed to be involved in. :)

Rev, what would your thoughts be should Ron Paul had ever been elected. Granted he wouldn't be appointing Rand for anything, he was able to do so on his own - but couldn't you say that perhaps Rand's decisions may perhaps be altered because Dad were in office? No reason on this question other than curiosity, no connection here.

[revelarts]

I tend to agree, Rev, on this one. But even if it is little consolation to you, I think Donald is a strong man, and will do what he wants to, even if Ivanka has other ideas.

I suspect you're right, either way, it appears his more "conservative" working class supporters will have far less influence than she will as a left leaning upper crust NewYorker.

[revelarts]

I'm sure you aren't thrilled with the 4,000 people he hires. Nor the amount of people that will be directly advising him. If not her it will be someone else. But since it's her, I say good choice, she's extremely smart and anything she works on will benefit from it.

With that said, I've yet to see anything at all that was given to her. Trump already stated he would have to check with his counsel to even see if she can work in certain areas. In other words, he wants to do it the right and legal way.


Uh, i like the Elaine Chao and Ben Carson, I'd be fine with Sessoms At another post I don't like him as AG at all. I hope he proves my suspicions wrong. the others that i'm learning about do turn me off for various reasons.
If he picked Ron Paul for a post (since you bring him Up) I'd like that too. Rand as well for the right position. There was a rumor at one point that Judge Napolitano was on his list of for federal judge or higher. I'd LOVE that. Also was rumor that Jesse Ventura might be in the mix somewhere. I'd have No problem with that either.

so No Jim I'm not against everyone by default. I hope that's not going to be your ONLY response to any of my or other people's complaints about Trump's actions. Asssuming that everyone whose not a fan 'just hates Trump'. If so you'd be wrong. But hey if you've got good reasons to rebut my points ok fine, we can debate those but please don't assume I'm just hatin' on Trump. I ... and others... have many good reasons for our complaints and caution. Even if you don't want to honestly address them.


We have anti-nepotism laws on the books. I'm sure this year more than any other year in existence, there will be folks watching and making sure Trump doesn't run afoul. If he goes too far, there are some waiting to pounce already. I don't think it's going to be an issue. But I'll be thrilled for as much as she'll legally be allowed to be involved in. :)

Rev, what would your thoughts be should Ron Paul had ever been elected. Granted he wouldn't be appointing Rand for anything, he was able to do so on his own - but couldn't you say that perhaps Rand's decisions may perhaps be altered because Dad were in office? No reason on this question other than curiosity, no connection here.

Frankly I'd be a little uncomfortable with the Father Son Presidential runs, especially back to back. But the Bushs basically did it. And at the time i didn't really think twice about it. Regretfully i voted for both of them. But as i said the family dynasty type thing is starting to bug me.
SaveSaveSaveSave

[jimnyc]

so No Jim I'm not against everyone by default. I hope that's not going to be your ONLY response to any of my or other people's complaints about Trump's actions. Asssuming that everyone whose not a fan 'just hates Trump'. If so you'd be wrong. But hey if you've got good reasons to rebut my points ok fine, we can debate those but please don't assume I'm just hatin' on Trump. I ... and others... have many good reasons for our complaints and caution. Even if you don't want to honestly address them.

And then ignore the part where I spoke of the laws in place, and that counsel would need to be involved, and that anti-nepotism laws are in place - and concentrate where you can rant. I have been 100% honest when I post. If I have a differing opinion than you that doesn't mean I am being dishonest.

Let me know when you would like to concentrate on the issues posted. :) I'll reply to that portion now...

[jimnyc]

Uh, i like the Elaine Chao and Ben Carson, I'd be fine with Sessoms At another post I don't like him as AG at all. I hope he proves my suspicions wrong. the others that i'm learning about do turn me off for various reasons.
If he picked Ron Paul for a post (since you bring him Up) I'd like that too. Rand as well for the right position. There was a rumor at one point that Judge Napolitano was on his list of for federal judge or higher. I'd LOVE that. Also was rumor that Jesse Ventura might be in the mix somewhere. I'd have No problem with that either.

I am thrilled to see Carson get a gig. I'm also thrilled with Sessions. I definitely like Nap too!! I dunno about Ventura. He went a little too far out into left field for me at times in the past 10-20 years.


Frankly I'd be a little uncomfortable with the Father Son Presidential runs, especially back to back. But the Bushs basically did it. And at the time i didn't really think twice about it.Regretfully i voted for both of them. But as i said the family dynasty type thing is starting to bug me.

I wouldn't be concerned myself, about the back to back runs. I was more asking about Rand being in congress, should Ron Paul had been president, and any conflict of interest that may have posed.

[revelarts]

And then ignore the part where I spoke of the laws in place, and that counsel would need to be involved, and that anti-nepotism laws are in place - and concentrate where you can rant. I have been 100% honest when I post. If I have a differing opinion than you that doesn't mean I am being dishonest.
Let me know when you would like to concentrate on the issues posted. :) I'll reply to that portion now...


As far as nepotism "laws" are concerned. I'm not sure there are any that apply when it comes to chatting up congress and handing out proposals for legislation, and having bureaucrats and congress people on speed dial Jim.
So i suspect the problem still stands in my mind.


But Jim are you saying that many of you're replies to me and others haven't practically started and and often ended with talk of "BUTTHURT".
and here's how you began you're reply to me in this post

I'm sure you aren't thrilled with the 4,000 people he hires. Nor the amount of people that will be directly advising him. ....

seems ... as i said... you're making assumptions about my views being completely biases by default, rather than addressing the content.
And since it's the 1st thing you write it kind of sets the tone for the rest.
SaveSave

[jimnyc]

As far as nepotism "laws" are concerned. I'm not sure there are any that apply when it comes to chatting up congress and handing out proposals for legislation, and having bureaucrats and congress people on speed dial Jim.
So i suspect the problem still stands in my mind.

What's to stop someone like her from chatting up various politicians and having folks on speed dial, even as a regular citizen? Her trying to put her hands and name in legislation, I suppose all I can say is that I don't see that happening at all. Not to mention I don't believe the law would allow for it. But this is worrying about something that hasn't happened nor proposed. I suppose we'll find out about it should it ever happen.

[jimnyc]

But Jim are you saying that many of you're replies to me and others haven't practically started and and often ended with talk of "BUTTHURT" and here's how you began you're reply to me in this post


seems ... as i said... you're making assumptions my views being completely biases by default, rather than addressing the content.

Since it the 1st thing you write kind of sets the tone for the rest.
SaveSave

You are spot on. I have in fact posted things wrongly to be an ass. And I also agree that posting in such a manner sets the tone. My bad. :(

[jimnyc]

This came from an article I was just reading about Jared Kushner and potentially getting a gig in the White House. I believe the first portion I posted shows how Ivanka can easily be in the White House 100% legally.

But, as to the 2nd portion, I don't agree with "wiggling" and going around law and precedent set. She shouldn't be in a position where she determines law, nor a position as Rev stated where she is proposing legislation.

I would be fine with an advisory role to the POTUS working in the WH.

-----

Past examples:

It would hardly be the first time a president has run into issues with nepotism in the White House.

John F. Kennedy picked his brother, Robert Kennedy, as his attorney general, though the current anti-nepotism statute wasn’t passed until 1967 -- four years after JFK was assassinated.

Former President Jimmy Carter also reportedly had a brush with the statute when he was prevented from hiring his son as a White House intern.

The most notable recent example, however, was in 1993, when Bill Clinton appointed First Lady Hillary Clinton as the chair of the president’s Task Force on National Health Care Reform, sparking a lawsuit in DC federal court.

A lobbying group at the time, known as the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, alleged that Hillary Clinton was acting outside her non-governmental role, and thus both were in violation of anti-nepotism laws.

The court's ruling was that the White House and Executive Office of the President were not agencies under federal anti-nepotism law. Multiple law experts contacted by ABC News believe this made way for the incoming president to potentially have leeway to appoint relatives to advisory positions in the White House.

-----

Due to the 1993 ruling, legal experts say Trump's wiggle room would be if he does not pay Kushner a salary, and appoints him to an advisory board that doesn't fall under a specific government agency.

"I think it clearly violates the intent of the law," said University of Minnesota law professor Richard Painter, who served as a Chief White House Ethics Lawyer from 2005-2007. "But there are arguments that could be used to try and wiggle around it if you were making an appointment in the White House."

Washington University of St. Louis law professor Kathleen Clark said Kushner would very likely still have to sign a non-disclosure agreement and another agreement not to trade on any sensitive information made available to him due to his access to the president.

There would be no technical restrictions on Trump keeping Kushner close as an informal adviser with no official role. And hiring Kushner as a "government contractor" could separate him entirely from the reach of the anti-nepotism statute, the experts argued.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nepotism-law-affect-jared-kushner-trumps-white-house/story?id=43619177

[revelarts]

What's to stop someone like her from chatting up various politicians and having folks on speed dial, even as a regular citizen?...


Jim, of course you're entitled to your opinion but i suspect if Obama's half brother and other family became naturalized citizens and began chatting up congress and advising Obama from space in the White House, suggesting new regulations/legislations (as Ivanka is doing)/
That you and other's that are carefree about Ivanka would have more a problems with Presidential Family Influencing U.S. gov't ...as a matter of principal of course.



...Sarah Chamberlain, the president and CEO of the center-right organization Republican Main Street Partnership, told Independent Journal Review that Ivanka Trump has been calling Republican members of Congress since her father’s victory last month.“She’s calling some to talk about the child care provisions,” Chamberlain said. “It’s gonna be a big issue for her.”…
“I think she’s hoping to [play a large role in the administration]. It did come out she’s gonna have an office in the East Wing and actually I think she’s gonna be a great addition. I think she was a huge help in getting her father elected.”

In case you’ve forgotten, Trump’s Ivanka-crafted child-care plan caused a ripple among the three conservatives left in the party when he announced it in September, as it guarantees six weeks of paid maternity leave for new mothers. Under the plan, if your employer won’t cover the cost of that, Uncle Sam will. The expense to taxpayers will, supposedly, be offset by eliminating fraud from the federal unemployment insurance program (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/13/donald-trump-joined-by-ivanka-trump-to-outline-child-care-policy/?utm_term=.563c4ea297ee), but ridding programs of “waste, fraud, and abuse” is a classic lip-service panacea for new federal spending....
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/15/ivanka-trump-phoning-republicans-in-congress-to-lobby-for-child-care-plans/

yes creating legislation and policy

[jimnyc]

Jim, of course you're entitled to your opinion but i suspect if Obama's half brother and other family became naturalized citizens and began chatting up congress and advising Obama from space in the White House, suggesting new regulations/legislations (as Ivanka is doing)/
That you and other's that are carefree about Ivanka would have more a problems with Presidential Family Influencing U.S. gov't ...as a matter of principal of course.

No one has been carefree. I clearly stated that I thought it needed to pass muster with Trump's counsel, and stated I don't think she should be making legislation and what not. I want whatever decisions they make pertaining to Ivanka to be be legal. That's not care free.

Chelsea Clinton has had access to and has dealt with a shitload of folks in congress. Big deal, I couldn't care less. It won't be the first time that family has had easier access to politicians, nor the last.


yes creating legislation and policy

Well, the childcare stuff wouldn't be the first time someone of the "female" persuasion in the WH has gotten involved with. But I don't think she should have her hands/name on anything to do in congress.