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.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
a reply to: Indigo5
So you can't come up with any reason of how this screws the American people, OK got it.
...or even how the law applies it seems.
The latest I heard is that it does not even apply to Whitehouse staff, only federal agency staff.
Have you not read the thread?
Or are you interjecting the "what I heard" nonsense in hopes of confusing facts?
(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.
(b) 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.
www.law.cornell.edu...
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
a reply to: Indigo5
So you can't come up with any reason of how this screws the American people, OK got it.
...or even how the law applies it seems.
The latest I heard is that it does not even apply to Whitehouse staff, only federal agency staff.
Have you not read the thread?
Or are you interjecting the "what I heard" nonsense in hopes of confusing facts?
(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.
(b) 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.
www.law.cornell.edu...
Yes I have and even posted the detail of what the Trump lawyers have advised him.
I will take their steer on it and not your interpretations.
It's hardly a big deal anyway.
(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.
(b) 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.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
a reply to: Indigo5
So you can't come up with any reason of how this screws the American people, OK got it.
...or even how the law applies it seems.
The latest I heard is that it does not even apply to Whitehouse staff, only federal agency staff.
Have you not read the thread?
Or are you interjecting the "what I heard" nonsense in hopes of confusing facts?
(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.
(b) 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.
www.law.cornell.edu...
Yes I have and even posted the detail of what the Trump lawyers have advised him.
I will take their steer on it and not your interpretations.
It's hardly a big deal anyway.
I will take the actual law over the legal pleadings of Trump's attorney's.
(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.
(b) 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.
www.law.cornell.edu...
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
a reply to: Indigo5
So you can't come up with any reason of how this screws the American people, OK got it.
...or even how the law applies it seems.
The latest I heard is that it does not even apply to Whitehouse staff, only federal agency staff.
Have you not read the thread?
Or are you interjecting the "what I heard" nonsense in hopes of confusing facts?
www.law.cornell.edu...
Yes I have and even posted the detail of what the Trump lawyers have advised him.
I will take their steer on it and not your interpretations.
It's hardly a big deal anyway.
I will take the actual law over the legal pleadings of Trump's attorney's.
(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.
(b) 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.
www.law.cornell.edu...
I already posted that.
The Whitehouse staff do not belong to a federal agency - that is the lawyers interpretation. All laws are interpreted.
It will be an easy one to solve, if his appointment holds then his lawyers were right , and your interpretation was wrong.
Given your inability to be objective, I will take the experts views over your every time.
“There’s some wording here they can try to wiggle around, but we all know the intent of the statute,” said Richard Painter, former top White House ethics counsel under President George W. Bush.
“The purpose of the statute seems to me to be to promote confidence in federal employees by prohibiting nepotism,” said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. “I don’t see why, logically, it makes sense to exempt the White House from the coverage of the statute.”
“There’s some wording here they can try to wiggle around, but we all know the intent of the statute,” said Richard Painter, former top White House ethics counsel under President George W. Bush.
“The purpose of the statute seems to me to be to promote confidence in federal employees by prohibiting nepotism,” said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. “I don’t see why, logically, it makes sense to exempt the White House from the coverage of the statute.”
..
Former Obama White House ethics counsel Norman Eisen dismissed the D.C. Circuit’s language about the anti-nepotism statute as far from definitive. “I would describe it as musing. It was not the holding of the case,” he said. “There’s a lot of maybes and possiblys in there.”
Eisen called a potential Kushner appointment “possibly or even probably illegal,” while acknowledging it’s unclear how a court would rule on the issue.
Law professor Steve Vladeck from the University of Texas told CNN in November that while the statute could be challenged, the risk is that a court could rule that any action taken by the relative in an official role could be questioned.
“While it’s true that the penalty for violation of the statute is just to withhold salary or other financial remuneration from the wrongfully appointed employee, there’s also the possibility that any action taken by such a wrongfully appointed employee could be subject to legal challenge and potentially even be voidable,” Vladeck said.
Two recent White House ethics counsels, Richard Painter and Norman Eisen, also believe an appointment such as Kushner’s would violate the Anti-Nepotism Statute.
The Whitehouse staff do not belong to a federal agency - that is the lawyers interpretation. All laws are interpreted.
Pay at the White House reflects higher salaries federal government employees, in general.
Top salaries of $172,200 go to 22 people in President Obama's core team, like Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Counselor John Podesta and Director of the National Economic Council Jeffrey Zients. Their salaries have remained the same since 2010, when President Obama froze the pay scale.
money.cnn.com...
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: BigTrumpFan
White House staffers, including the senior advisors, are federal employees.
Pay at the White House reflects higher salaries federal government employees, in general.
Top salaries of $172,200 go to 22 people in President Obama's core team, like Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Counselor John Podesta and Director of the National Economic Council Jeffrey Zients. Their salaries have remained the same since 2010, when President Obama froze the pay scale.
money.cnn.com...
WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for civilian federal workers.....
Civilian federal workers like Valerie Jarrett, Obama's Senior Advisor.
Need more? White House Salaries
Valerie Jarrett, line# 199, is listed as "EMPLOYEE", as in Federal Employee!
(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.
(b) 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.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: BigTrumpFan
White House staffers, including the senior advisors, are federal employees.
Pay at the White House reflects higher salaries federal government employees, in general.
Top salaries of $172,200 go to 22 people in President Obama's core team, like Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Counselor John Podesta and Director of the National Economic Council Jeffrey Zients. Their salaries have remained the same since 2010, when President Obama froze the pay scale.
money.cnn.com...
WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for civilian federal workers.....
Civilian federal workers like Valerie Jarrett, Obama's Senior Advisor.
Need more? White House Salaries
Valerie Jarrett, line# 199, is listed as "EMPLOYEE", as in Federal Employee!
Federal Agency is the term covered by the LBJ law.
We will get the outcome shortly. Yours, and my own, interpretations are pretty meaningless right now.
originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: windword
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.
We'll see if the Executive Office of the Presidency is classified as such an agency. That is the point, I believe, the lawyers are making. That it is not.
originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: windword
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.
We'll see if the Executive Office of the Presidency is classified as such an agency. That is the point, I believe, the lawyers are making. That it is not.