Ivanka- it's now official....

[lovedogs]

I found a relevant thing:

Bolding is mine for reference

5 U.S. Code § 3110 - Employment of relatives; restrictions

1. For the purpose of this section—
   
   1. “agency” means—
      
      1. an Executive agency;
      2. an office, agency, or other establishment in the legislative branch;
      3. an office, agency, or other establishment in the judicial branch; and
      4. the government of the District of Columbia;
   2. “public official” means an officer (including the President and a Member of Congress), a member of the uniformed service, an employee and any other individual, in whom is vested the authority by law, rule, or regulation, or to whom the authority has been delegated, to appoint, employ, promote, or advance individuals, or to recommend individuals for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement in connection with employment in an agency; and
      
      
   3. “relative” means, with respect to a public official, an individual who is related to the public official as father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, or half sister.
      
2. A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official. An individual may not be appointed, employed, promoted, or advanced in or to a civilian position in an agency if such appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement has been advocated by a public official, serving in or exercising jurisdiction or control over the agency, who is a relative of the individual.

 

[Dee*Jay]

You said that Ivanka should have been more outspoken about her father.

And I am saying Hillary should have done the same with Bill.

Either both are innocent, or both guilty in their silence.

A big difference for me that is that Monica was (to the best of my knowledge) a willing participant in the events. Unlike the myriad of women who were being grabbed and groped against their will and the (sometimes underage) pageant contestants who were suddenly being ogled by the dirty old man running the show. It's one thing for your husband to commit adultery, it's another to force himself upon women and behave like a lech.

 

[azstonie]

"It's pick pick pick here."

Uh huh.

 

[ruby59]

A big difference for me that is that Monica was (to the best of my knowledge) a willing participant in the events. Unlike the myriad of women who were being grabbed and groped against their will and the (sometimes underage) pageant contestants who were suddenly being ogled by the dirty old man running the show. It's one thing for your husband to commit adultery, it's another to force himself upon women and behave like a lech.

I seriously doubt Monica was the first or only female to come across Bill's radar and who was willing and who was coerced.

 

[Dee*Jay]

I seriously doubt Monica was the first female to come across Bill's radar and who was willing and who was coerced.

So wait -- are we now talking about all women? Because I was responding to the comment you made about the cigar, which of course refers to Monica Lewinsky. But if this conversation is expanding to include all women, all blue dresses, all dresses of any color, etc., etc., etc., then we've got a rather long night ahead of us and I have an appointment at 7 am to take my Lexus in for a timing belt replacement...

 

[lovedogs]

How can you be both "willing" and "coerced"?

 

[the_mother_thing]

How can you be both "willing" and "coerced"?

Pretty easily ... she willingly began an affair with him, and he possibly coerced her continued silence and 'services' with promises of advancement, financial reward, or threats of negative implications.

 

[lovedogs]

Willing at the beginning and coerced to stay are different than being willing and coerced. But you are correct that you can be willing at first and then coerced.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Does anyone remember John F Kennedy.

Most of the PSer liberals are too young to know about JFK and his brother the AG RFK.

 

[Dancing Fire]

You're right Ruby. Everything is -- and always will be -- Hillary's fault.

w/o Obama and HRC there wouldn't be a Prez. Trump today. Food for thought for all the Trump haters here.

 

[Tekate]

So? He trusts her and maybe she will have a more calming effect on him. She is very bright and professional. I would think you would be happy about it.

About as happy as you would feel if Chelsea Clinton were working closely with her mother.

 

[Tekate]

w/o Obama and HRC there wouldn't be a Prez. Trump today. Food for thought for all the Trump haters here.

Logical fallacy.

 

[ruby59]

Logical fallacy.

Same as knowing how we would react if Hillary was grooming Chelsea.

 

[redwood66]

About as happy as you would feel if Chelsea Clinton were working closely with her mother.

I would feel the exact same way I do about Ivanka. I do not get disturbed by things as petty as this.

 

[Tekate]

As my hubby says: you're a better than man than I Gunga Din! (I think that was some movie saying?)

 

[AGBF]

As my hubby says: you're a better than man than I Gunga Din! (I think that was some movie saying?)

No. It's right from the poem.

 

[Tekate]

No. It's right from the poem.

Yeah, I was being lazy! and thank you!!!

 

[AGBF]

It's in the last stanza:


Gunga Din

by Rudyard Kipling


"You Lazarushian-leather Gunga Din!
Tho' I've belted you an' flayed you,
By the livin' Gawd that made you,
You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!"

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

Yeah, I was being lazy! and thank you!!!

Sorry. Just saw this after posting more, Kate!

Deb