Skip to main content

Nepotism Is Serious

The princess says she has “heard the concerns some have with my advising the President in my personal capacity while voluntarily complying with all ethics rules, and I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees.”

Princess Ivanka went on: “Throughout this process, I have been working closely and in good faith with the White House counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role.”

The prince and the princess would have us believe that they are capable of taking on any high power position without an iota of professional background in those positions and that they are the best persons for the job. They freshly arrive in Washington at the top of the ladder in American government. The prince and the princess have been materialistically endowed at birth. They have experience in real estate development, publishing, and producing a fashion line manufactured in global low cost labor markets. As Daddy was delivering his speech about bringing back American jobs and buying American, princess Ivanka was busy importing 50 tons of product from China. Normally one would expect an administration to bring in top advisers with whom there is an agreement on stated policy, but exceptions can be made for close relatives.

Princess Ivanka presents a sweet innocent face to the world but she is well practiced in the art of manipulation. It is “some” who have “concerns”, she glibly tells us. Ivanka’s failure to articulate a more detailed description belies her real modus operandi. Ivanka doesn’t care about the concerns of anyone who does not see things her way. She is going to do what she wants to do even if she has to fly in the face of US law to do so. Her disregard for our rule of law is out for all to see but she can get away with it, she thinks, with a little well crafted social rhetoric and proper co-operation from our media. Rules are meant to be broken, especially by the power elite.

Who are the nonentities that the princess relegates as “some”? Does her vaguarity refer to the American people, excluding Trump supporters who will support anything the new American dynasty does? Unlikely! Ivanka lives in a world isolated from the commoners. Like her dad, she markets herself as the voice of the people. Ivank’s cause is the women’s cause- represented always in the image of Ivanka herself as the face of every woman. Whatever she wants is what every woman wants. That’s all we need to know.

When Ivanka says “some” have concerns, it is more reasonable to speculate that she means “some” of her “council” have concerns (about anti-nepotism laws).

Why does Ivanka need “counsel” in determining what the US anti-nepostism code intends? Did Ivanka manage to graduate from high school without taking classes? It is very simple what the US nepotism code says. It is written in plain English. Did Ivanka complete English courses in high school- or was she simply awarded a degree as an entitlement?
This is what the US Code says about hiring relatives:
5 U.S. Code § 3110 — Employment of relatives; restrictions
(a) For the purpose of this section — 
“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
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.

Does Ivanka need to counsel to figure out what that says , or, does she need counsel to figure out how she can get around it?
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.
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.
That means neither Jared nor Ivanka can “volunteer” to work without pay. The law prohibits those violating US anti-nepotism code from being paid. There is nothing ethical about grabbing power by committing acts prohibited by law. It is highly unethical to spin it that way, relying on the media and others not to call you out on it, that is to say relying on “swamp ethics” to allow one to take whatever one wants.

The media has been complicit in spinning the violation of US anti-nepotism code for members of the Trump would- be dynasty, relying on Bill Clinton’s appointment of Hillary Clinton as a precedent — as if to say violating a law without penalty is the same as repealing the law. Repealing laws are not under the jurisdiction of the administrative branch of government. That authority belongs to Congress.

It is being portrayed in the media that “the only penalty” for violating the anti-nepotism code is the prohibition against receiving pay. The code does not identify the prohibition against receiving pay as a “penalty” The code simply states that one cannot receive pay for a position one holds in violation of the law. If such an interpretation were viable it could be stated unambiguously as “ A relative can be employed without being in violation of the code if the relative is not paid”. Instead the code says that those in violation of the code cannot be paid. Paid or unpaid, nepotism violates US code. There is no way to spin it as ethical.

The code refers to “a civilian position “. “Civilian Position “ is defined in the Glossary of Federal Terms:
CIVILIAN POSITION — A civilian office or position (including a temporary or part-time or intermittent position), appointive or elective, in the legislative, executive, or judicial branch of the Federal Government (including each corporation owned or controlled by the Federal Government and including nonappropriated fund instrumentalities under the jurisdiction of the Armed Forces) or in the Government of the District of Columbia.
This author is not a lawyer but submits that it is reasonable to presume that civil positions are subject to civilian penalties. Wikipedia has this to say about civilian penalties- note it is left to the judiciary to determine the penalty:
Civil penalties occupy a strange place in some legal systems — because they are not criminal penalties, the state need not meet a burden of proof that is “ balance of probabilities “; but because the action is brought by the government, and some civil penalties can run into the millions of dollars, it would be uncomfortable to subject citizens to them by a burden of proof that is merely a “ preponderance of the evidence .” Therefore, the assessment of most civil penalties requires a finding of “ clear and convincing evidence “ before a civil defendant will be held liable. A defendant may well raise excuses, justifications , affirmative defenses , and procedural defenses . An administrative law judge or hearing officer may oversee the proceedings and render a judgment . Judgment is made on the balance of probabilities. Meaning, if it is more than 50% likely that the accused is responsible then the accused shall be found guilty
In some cases, a civil penalty may be supplemented by other legal process, including administrative sanctions or even criminal charges, and their respective appeals . For example, failure to pay a fine assessed for a traffic code violation may result in administrative suspension of a driver’s license , and further driving after suspension may be a criminal offense. On the other hand, a minimal case may be “put on file”, or otherwise suspended for a period during which the defendant may be required to avoid further violations, or carry out specific duties (such as making repairs or restitution, or attending supplemental education), after which the matter is dismissed.
So we can compare the violation of our anti-nepotism code to a traffic violation in which the penalty is up to the judge. Judges take into consideration individual impact. If one were to fine an average person $1000.00 for violating a traffic law, providing there is no life threatening circumstance, this might be considered a severe penalty, but if that person were a Trump, it would hardly be a penalty at all and to merely work in a high power position against our laws without receiving pay without a doubt qualifies as no penalty at all. The Trumps believe they can get a way with it and even spin it as a case of exhibiting high ethics. only adding insult to our rule of law to the injury. If this is even before a judge, let us hope he/she takes that into consideration.

From “the prince and princess are “voluntarily” declining pay for positions they are prohibited by law from holding, it becomes “it is an ethical act to voluntarily decline pay which the law prohibits one from receiving “. This is true gas lighting of the American rule of law. There is nothing ethical about it. The claims of “voluntarily” abiding by one section of the law while violating another section of the same law and then spun as “upholding ethics” is a deep doubling down on unethical behavior with intent to skirt the law.

There is another legal aspect to the anti nepotism code:
But doing so would risk putting their decisions on shaky legal ground, experts say.
“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,” said Steve Vladeck, a CNN contributor and professor of law at the University of Texas School of Law. Could Donald Trump’s kids serve in his administration?
That one should be interesting to watch, especially with the prince holding what some say amounts to six full time jobs.

Princess Ivanka, in her newly acquired power is to have security clearance and an West Wing office. Will she volunteer to cover all the costs of her office or will she pass that cost on the the ubiquitous “some” ? If the costs of her office are paid by the public, is it equivalent to Ivanka receiving pay ?
Why do we have nepotism laws? Because monarchies, notabilities, hegemonies and oligarchies are quintessentially UN-American.

The Trump regime was promoted into power by the anti-establishment movement. The anti-establishment movement framed the Bushes and the Clintons as dynasties. Dynasties were portrayed as the worst face of the ‘establishment” Now the Trump family is positioning itself to become America’s next dynasty.

And about that anti-establishment agenda- that in a nutshell is Moscow’s agenda- to bring down western established systems of government. Once again the Trump administration is in harmony with the end game of the Russian propaganda industry.


Popular posts from this blog

An Incomplete Theory of Inflation Made to Order for Mass Consumption.

M oney is not what it used to be, so must our ways of thinking about it adapt. jaakko-kemppainen-unsplash The message treads across the media terrain, beating louder and louder as if to drown out the beat of the distant drummer. W arning! The only thing the stimulus will stimulate is inflation. The people will pay as the wealthy elite invests their windfalls in financial assets. Doom and gloom set to march across the land to the beat of the distribution of stimulus funds. In recent years as past predictions of fiscal disaster following stimulus spending failed to materialize and so the thinking about national debt and deficits has evolved, most noticeably with the development of  Modern Monetary Theory . In the   fall of 2020,  National Affairs  published a story,  Does the Debt Matter ? by Peter Wehner & Ian Tufts. Peter Wehner is vice president and senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and served in the last three Republican administrations. Ian Tufts is a recent g

JECD Group Holds Master Plan Pow Wow for Boothbay Peninsula

The most honest statement to come out of the ringleaders of the Joint Economic Community Development Group in their first workshop program was "none of us are experts on economic development", which in my most humble opinion is evident in the fact that the JECD begins with the premise that economic development can be master minded by central management. The article in the Boothbay Register begins with this paragraph: The Joint Economic Development Committee master plan workshop on Thursday, Oct. 12 discuss findings from stakeholder interviews conducted early last month. The interviews centered around building an overall economic development strategy for Edgecomb, Boothbay, Boothbay Harbor and Southport. Who are the stakeholders?  A search for articles in the Boothbay Register comes up short. Why is the public not told who the stakeholders are. Since the taxpayers of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor footed the bill for the JECD's consultants, why are they not the stakeh

Why are social impact investors trying so hard to defeat smaller shelters for the homeless?

  "Social Impact” developers in Portland, Maine seek to squelch a referendum for smaller shelters called for by qualified practitioners with concrete experience in the field. A large sign says Vote C to support the Homeless, small handmade sign next to it says Untrue! That sign is paid for by developers who want / Photo by Jess Falero In   the 1970s under Governor Longley , Maine became a centrally managed economy that expanded Maine’s wealth gap and merged, almost seamlessly, the public and private and the non-profit and for-profit economic sectors into one mutually beneficial wealth-concentration & distribution system. Currently, mutually benefitting factions are coming together once again in hopes of building a mega-shelter for the homeless in a Portland, Maine industrial development district. In addition to beds for the homeless, the project will include, dining, and locker facilities, as well as offices and an attached health clinic. The promotion  describes the facility