White House Chief of Staff Memo from John Kelly to McGahn, Hagin, Sessions, Coats and Wray – “Re: Improvements to the Clearance Process” (16.02.2018)
I write what I like.
If you have followed the Right Wing media in the United States, the key persons would be Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly or Alex Jones. But a person who is now as significant and whose a Fox News Contributor on the Sean Hannity Show is Tomi Lahren. She has gone from being a rising star on The Blaze which is run by Glenn Beck. After being fired for her pro-life admissions on the View, she became a slogan-queen on a Great American Alliance. From there she has become a part of Sean Hannity’s show. Therefore, the nonsense of her still matters. Because she is on the biggest news commentary show of the Right Wing and the Republican Party.
The Fox News are initially state TV at this point, where the Presidents agenda and wanting to defend him no matter what he do. Even stand by his conspiracies and his vicious attacks, even if there are no evidence or no basis for the matter. Like Tomi Lahren was during the Government Shutdown, blaming the Democrats for the shutdown. Tomi just did what the Republicans did too, hit that Narrative, even as the House of Representatives, Senate and the Presidency was run by Republican’s. It cannot be Democrats direct fault. Secondly, the negotiations had been hectic and the White House was running in circles. Therefore, even Senate leader Mitch McConnell wondered what Trump wanted. This proves that the stories portrayed from the State TV and Fox was fictitious.
That is the trouble I have with Tomi Lahren, her reality and the messages she sends often make no sense. She speaks of freedom of speech on her behalf and for the republicans. Republicans can march and can speak out, they can stand and use all methods to spread their message. However, when Beyonce or Colin Kaepernick did what they did for their causes. Then it was wrong, because Blue Lives Matter, not only Black Lives Matter. BLM has even called all sorts of things by Tomi, but she has not said similar about White Supremacists or addressed the Charlottesville attacks. That is because it is the right group who did violence, while peaceful protest done by leftist is wrong. Just like the Woman’s marches on the One Year Anniversary of Trump Presidency was also catching heat from Lahren. Because, if these was Tea-Party Woman, it would be cool, but since they addressed the womanizer-in-charge, the President and the #MeToo issue. To make their own messages and try to empower themselves in a time of harassment in working places. That has to be taken care of and warnings of misconduct should be taken serious. Instead, Lahren was mocking it and said these woman should do something else. Well, did she think her rights to her own body and allowing her to abort if she wants came without marches in America? Lahren needs to read a book on Woman’s Right in the US.
That means in general that she is demeaning the Freedom of Speech and of liberty. That only the narrative and stories, which matters, that is why it is tiring and that Lahren has gotten this prime-time spot and that Hannity has given her this slice of TV. A this point there is little difference between her and White House Counselor Kellyann Conway or White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. All of them is spinning the same narratives, it just their titles and their positions. They are using the words, but all defending Trump by all means. Making his hypocritical acts and words into poetry. They are trying to make vomit into Shakespeare and hope people sees the same.
Fox News is state TV and its known. If you didn’t know. Now you do. To see how she makes everything leftist and using her voice to address people. Instead of building people up or using her voice for something positive. Since she actually has a stage. Lahren is using it to blame people for the Tide Pod Challenge and blaming the parents. Tomi could have listen and asked how this trend became a thing. But using it to make parents sensing the up-coming elections.
It is like, she can pin-point at anyone outside her camp. Blame them and throw trash at them. But if his master and the MAGA crowd is the trolls, the terrorists or the ones who creates the problem. She still deflects and blame the left. It is like no matter what President Trump does or have done. It is fine, but if Obama or Clinton did the same it would be full war. If Obama had paid porn-star and cheated on his wife. Lahren would have gone of the wires. Since Trump was having relations with Stormy Daniels. The RNC and the Republican Party hasn’t addressed this. All others has to fall on their swords when they do something like this or impeached, but Trump is the Holy Grail.
Tomi Lahren could have spread a positive message, she could have done that even inside the Right Wing. Not all there are hating on minorities, not everyone is playing games with people’s lives. Many do and many uses immigration and using taxes to take control. Like the RNC has done and proven how they uses meaningful government programs with humanity as bargain chips for a border-wall and other pledges of Trump. This is something Lahren knows, but still she defends it by all means.
Her last words are usually strong and fierce, but not facts. They are defending a narrative that isn’t building a United Republic. Instead, it is continuing to spread vile content. Is that the legacy and the words you will be remembered for? Is your fame and fortunes based on hatred and misuse of patriotism for one man and his selfish political position. Trump uses people and will use Fox News. He will use Sean Hannity and Alex Jones, they will be seen as cup-cakes and fear-mongers as they are. Even Tucker Carlson are looking more foolish as the days goes by. In the same box and inside the same sphere of influence is Lahren.
You could have used your position for something more fruitful. Not necessary a progressive aspect, but used it. So it made sense, not speaking of right wing agenda, family values and then defending cheating President. Not defending patriotism, but saying to the ones defending the real values smearing them with hatred. It so backwards into the future. However, we from the outside of America sees it. But you in the bubble cannot grasp it.
Lahren and the State TV has to look into their mirror and wonder if they become cyber- and broadcasting bullies with high-paid salaries sanctioned by Rupert Murdoch. We can wonder if that is the reason for the existence of the Fox TV Channel. The Broadcasting is becoming InfoWars and Breitbart, but with better lightning. Is that the memo we can take for this day and age?
Lahren, was this your destiny to defend a scrupulous man, which happen to be the President. Is that your motivation and aspiration. You have no true ethical and moral backbone, whatever he does or says, you will a story to defend it? Is that who you are?
So you will be blind to facts and science itself, to any common sense, as long as it fits the President? That is good to know, because if he back peddles, if he back-flips or even raises eyebrows for the Republican’s we will know. Because back in the day, he used to pay Democratic Politicians and use them for building his buildings. Therefore, his moral authority is non-existent, that is known for the rest of us. But not you.
ME: “So Tomi Lahren, will you take this President? Donald J. Trump, Honor him, bow down to him and as long as you can in your professional career. Stand by him and promote his ideas, in good and bad days, promote his disgusting and vicious believes, his attacks on his own institutions and family values. Will you be his propaganda tool?”
Me: If so say “YES”. Tomi Lahren: “Yes”
Me: “And you will be together in the time he is in Office. You can now take the ring and kiss the flag. Your now officially his propaganda tool and useful contributor on State TV. The President will never praise you or hold your hand. But you wash his in good and bad days. We can now all say Amen”. Tomi Lahren: It’s my final thoughts, A-MEN God Bless the President and the United States!”.
“3 U.S. Code § 105 – Assistance and services for the President: (e) Assistance and services authorized pursuant to this section to the President are authorized to be provided to the spouse of the President in connection with assistance provided by such spouse to the President in the discharge of the President’s duties and responsibilities. If the President does not have a spouse, such assistance and services may be provided for such purposes to a member of the President’s family whom the President designates” (Cornell Law School).
I don’t know about you, but it’s just one of these days, where you see entitlement in the New York Gang or the Trump Administration. This was made and prepared for the President Donald J. Trump, as he was swearing-in and starting his term. Because the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), who is in-charge of checking and making the sure the personnel and staff is following the codes and procedures for their roles in government. Seriously, the OGE Lawyer worked the laws in his favor, even when I struggle to see it. My first question after reading the US Code 105 Title 5(d), did the President loose his wife? Therefore, because of his tragic loss, he needed counsel from son-in-law Jared Kushner and oldest daughter Ivanka Trump inside the White House. How can you spell the code wrong, “If the President does not have a spouse”. True she was in New York the first months of the Presidency. Still, she was still his spouse, meaning that “he had”. But before I rant, take a look into key parts of the reasoning for the appointments of his family inside the White House!
“Section 3110 of title 5, also known as the anti-nepotism statute, states that “[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.” 5 U.S.C. § 3110(b). The statute expressly identifies the President as one of the “public official[s]” subject to the prohibition, and a son-in-law is a covered “relative.” Id. § 3110(a)(2), (a)(3). Moreover, under Article II of the Constitution, the President exercises “jurisdiction or control” over the White House Office as well as over the rest of the Executive Branch. See Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 163–64 (1926); Inspector General Legislation, 1 Op. O.L.C. 16, 17 (1977). Less certain is whether the White House Office is an “agency”—a term that section 3110 defines to include an “Executive agency,” thereby calling up the definition of “Executive agency” generally applicable to title 5, see 5 U.S.C. § 3110(a)(1)(A); id. § 105. But whether or not the White House Office meets this definition (a subject to which we will return in Part II, infra), we believe that the President’s special hiring authority in 3 U.S.C. § 105(a) permits him to make appointments to the White House Office that the anti-nepotism statute might otherwise forbid” (Koffsky, P:2, 2017).
“A President wanting a relative’s advice on governmental matters therefore has a choice: to seek that advice on an unofficial, ad hoc basis without conferring the status and imposing the responsibilities that accompany formal White House positions; or to appoint his relative to the White House under title 3 and subject him to substantial restrictions against conflicts of interest. Cf. AAPS, 997 F.2d at 911 n.10 (declining, after holding that the First Lady qualifies as a “full-time officer or employee” of the government under FACA, to decide her status under the conflict of interest statutes). In choosing his personal staff, the President enjoys an unusual degree of freedom, which Congress found suitable to the demands of his office. Any appointment to that staff, however, carries with it a set of legal restrictions, by which Congress has regulated and fenced in the conduct of federal officials” (Koffsky, P: 16-17, 2017).
I will not jumping jacks around this OGE Lawyer Koffsky, but office that is run by the President is an Executive Office, that issues Executive Orders and Executive Memorandums. That if followed by current law and within provisions within the state because legal and acts that all citizens has to follow. To subject the White House into a sublime role of the state is demeaning, even if he needs support of the branches of government like the Courts and Congress. But that doesn’t make the White House into a playhouse for playboy bunnies, its the place where executive orders and legal minds meet to determine the future of the Republic. It’s insulting that Koffsky is belittling the office and the White House, so it fits legally President role and his ability to appoint family members.
Yes, the President is allowed to seek advice and that ad-hock with family members. That is without doubt, but that is different ones in while speak with an uncle in Louisiana before making a decision that matters for both United States and the World itself. There is problematic to hire family into the White House, as their supposed restrictions and the boundaries of their roles. Since the family bond will not be cut, but be ever present in the decision making.
That Jared Kushner is a Public Official is clear with his title and responsibilities, as a Senior Advisor to the President, who is working on American Innovation, Peace in the Middle East and combating the Opioid crisis in the United States. Ivanka Trump is by title the Assistance to the President. Both of them has had a public role and been acting as Public Officials. They have been there, traveling with the President and even taking his place when he was tired or wanted to relax. Like Ivanka Trump did during the G-20 in July 2017, when the not-elected family member took the seat G20 Leaders Table. So her assistance goes further than ordinary public officials. Since, this sort of role would usually end on Secretary of State and the Vice-President. However, it isn’t the case in the matter of Trump Family.
“Enforcement. While the statutory language bars the appointment of relatives as well as the acceptance of such appointments, enforcement of the prohibition may be limited. The remedy expressly provided for violating this prohibition states that the appointed individual “is not entitled to pay, and money may not be paid from the Treasury as pay” for that person. The statute itself does not require nor does it provide expressly for removal of the individual from the federal civilian position. As noted above, the provision was directed at stopping the practice of placing relatives on the government payroll, and thus the law assures that a relative so appointed may not be paid from federal funds for any such service. The statute likewise does not provide a penalty for the public official who appointed the individual. However, it may be noted that for some rank-and-file positions, not of a confidential or policy making nature, the appointment of a relative may involve a “prohibited personnel practice” by the appointing official” (CRS Report & Analysis, 2016).
Here is another one giving leeway for the possible hiring of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, that is if they are in their roles unpaid and with ranks. Even, that is an issue with the role of the Senior Advisor Kushner and all his positions, even the clearances he needs to be able to fulfill his duty at the White House. Ivanka has also been part of the close-knitted leadership of his fathers. She been part of meetings and such. So both of them has been have been close to confidential material most likely, as they work so close with their relative, the President.
Just like covered in People Magazine in January 2017: “Though Kushner’s appointment does not require Senate confirmation, it is a controversial one: Anti-nepotism laws forbid the hiring of relatives to Cabinet positions, but are less clear on whether they can be appointed to White House staff roles. In American history, anti-nepotism laws are actually a relatively recent development: They were put into place in 1967 by then-President Lyndon B. Johnson not long after one of his predecessor’s appointments raised eyebrows” (Pearl, 2017).
So even if the law and the Anti-nepotism law are put in place to accept family members in White House roles. Still, the nepotism is in full affect. There is no half-step on that. The United States should have a hard time accepting the appointment of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump as Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President. All of this has entitled them and given them a special role in the Executive Office of the United States. What is clear by the U.S. Code 105, title 5(d) and will always stand out for the provision in the code that said this: “If the President does not have a spouse, such assistance and services may be provided for such purposes to a member of the President’s family whom the President designates”.
The President has a spouse, his third wife, Melanie, therefore he doe not need such assistance and services. Instead, they are using the titles in the anti-nepotism statutes, they can most likely not be as valuable as these words. However, Koffsky wrote this: “or to appoint his relative to the White House under title 3 and subject him to substantial restrictions against conflicts of interest”. These words are saying that its set substantial restrictions to the office, even as the President has let them be a vital part of his term, Kushner is nearly saving half of America and the Middle-East. Ivanka is publicly part abroad and in Washington. It’s not like they are restricted in that manner, but creating conflicts of interests. That should worry anyone caring about the honest of the public office.
Therefore it was striking what Jason Chafetz said in January 2017: “According to Josh Chafetz, a professor at Cornell Law School and an expert in constitutional law and legislative procedure, the White House is not regulated in the same way as other administrative agencies. “The bigger issue for the administration is not so much about the technical bounds of these nepotism laws, but it just looks bad,” Chafetz said. “I don’t think there’s anything legal that can be done in terms of the appointment. It just looks like there’s a pattern of cronyism that has emerged, especially in conjunction with the cabinet appointments.” (Delkic & Mallin, 2017).
It’s enough. Peace.
Koffsky, Daniel L. – ‘Application of the Anti-Nepotism Statute to a Presidential Appointment in the White House Office’ (20.01.2017)
Cornell Law School – ‘U.S. Code › Title 3 › Chapter 2 › § 105’ link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/105
CRS Report & Analysis – ‘The Federal Anti-Nepotism Statute: Limits on Appointing, Hiring, and Promoting Relatives’ (12.01.2016) link: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/nepotism.pdf
Delkic, Melina & Mallin, Alex – ‘Nepotism Laws Don’t Apply to Jared Kushner Appointment, DOJ Says’ (21.01.2017) link: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nepotism-laws-apply-jared-kushner-appointment-doj/story?id=44951811
Pearl, Diana – ‘Donald Trump’s Son-in-Law Has Hillary Clinton to Thank for Skirting JFK-Inspired Nepotism Rules’ (11.01.2017) link: http://people.com/politics/jared-kushner-nepotism-laws-donald-trump/