Accepting Nomination From White House Lawn Violates Hatch Act

Hello coldjoint,

So did Obama and he was fined.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-085784
So fine Trump. Leave his tax returns out of it. Also remember it is the campaign that is responsible, not the man.

"For critics of the Obama campaign, the audit was a reminder of other reporting errors by the 2008 effort, which campaign officials said they tried to correct in real-time. But independent experts, including former FEC commissioner Michael Toner, said after the audit was released that the infractions were relatively minor, given the scope of the campaign. "

OK, the problem here was timely reporting. And the fine was paid to make restitution. Failure to report at all is a different matter. That's what Trump did, tried to get away with something wrong, tried to cover up the scandal. A far more egregious violation.

It should also be noted that the failure to report on time was probably not President Obama's personal oversight, but a member of his campaign. President Trump personally signed the hush-money check.

And another point. If the Obama campaign did something wrong, they did something wrong. It is agreed that it was wrong and the fine was paid. That doesn't make it right. It was definitely wrong, what the Obama campaign did. That doesn't make it OK for Trump to do something wrong, too. Two wrongs never make a right. Just because somebody else did something wrong does not make it OK for others to do wrong as well. What Trump did was wrong, and it was sneaky. And he tried to get away with it, and he never made any restitution. He owes the American people that restitution and it is unpaid. President Trump has violated the American people and he has not made good on it.
 
Hello coldjoint,

It does not matter, the Democrats do. Sorry Trump is not a racist.

Yes, Trump is totally a racist. He discriminated against blacks when he was managing rental apartments. Had a special code to be written onto the rental application for blacks. If blacks applied they were told there were no apartments available. If whites applied they were shown available units.
 
Hello coldjoint,



Yes, Trump is totally a racist. He discriminated against blacks when he was managing rental apartments. Had a special code to be written onto the rental application for blacks. If blacks applied they were told there were no apartments available. If whites applied they were shown available units.

No, he is not a racist but you are and you hate the American people.

You cheered when the economy was harmed by the virus from China that China failed to contain.
 
President Trump disregards the law when he thinks he can get away with it, and he is ready with lots of high dollar lawyers to fight his case. He has more court cases than any other president. He is always running afoul of the law.

President Trump is guilty of fraud.

He defrauded the general public who responded to ads for his 'Trump University.' He charged people thousands of dollars to 'enroll,' but it wasn't really a university at all. There was no accreditation, no assignments, no tests, no degrees. Just a series of lectures. 'Students' were promised in-person lectures by Trump himself but that never occurred. The students were defrauded. It was really a big rip-off. They filed a big lawsuit over it. Trump hired a bunch of lawyers to fight it as he usually does when he defrauds people.

Then he won the election. He didn't want the bad PR of the court case playing out in the press as he prepared to take office, so he settled. He admitted he had no case. He paid off all the students. He had to pay $25 million to settle the case.

Then, to distract from the news that he settled the fraud case, he made a big Twitter stink about the Hamilton players appealing to VP-elect Pence for decency in government. This was a precursor for much of America into the way Trump operates and how he plays the media, works the news cycle to his advantage.

There is no substance to any credibility of Trump. It's all a facade. He is a crook who is adept at 'working the media.'
 
President Trump disregards the law when he thinks he can get away with it, and he is ready with lots of high dollar lawyers to fight his case. He has more court cases than any other president. He is always running afoul of the law.

President Trump is guilty of fraud.

He defrauded the general public who responded to ads for his 'Trump University.' He charged people thousands of dollars to 'enroll,' but it wasn't really a university at all. There was no accreditation, no assignments, no tests, no degrees. Just a series of lectures. 'Students' were promised in-person lectures by Trump himself but that never occurred. The students were defrauded. It was really a big rip-off. They filed a big lawsuit over it. Trump hired a bunch of lawyers to fight it as he usually does when he defrauds people.

Then he won the election. He didn't want the bad PR of the court case playing out in the press as he prepared to take office, so he settled. He admitted he had no case. He paid off all the students. He had to pay $25 million to settle the case.

Then, to distract from the news that he settled the fraud case, he made a big Twitter stink about the Hamilton players appealing to VP-elect Pence for decency in government. This was a precursor for much of America into the way Trump operates and how he plays the media, works the news cycle to his advantage.

There is no substance to any credibility of Trump. It's all a facade. He is a crook who is adept at 'working the media.'

Horse mierda, Snowflake.

You cheered when the economy was harmed by the virus from China that China failed to contain.
 
President Trump disregards the law when he thinks he can get away with it.......

You keep repeating that same punkass bitch ass lie. You're such a BITCH.



"There was nothing unlawful or improper about Trump's acceptance speech"
https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...ul-or-improper-about-trumps-acceptance-speech

The talking heads and pundits attacking President Trump for giving his Republican National Convention acceptance speech from the White House lawn need to actually read the law. The Hatch Act is a precisely written statute — as is appropriate for a law that limits the indisputable First Amendment rights of federal workers — and it supports the president.

First and foremost, the Hatch Act explicitly exempts the president and vice president from its strictures. It defines “employee,” to which the Hatch Act’s restrictions apply, as someone “other than the President or Vice President.” This is constitutionally required because the president is a co-equal branch of the federal government and Congress can no more limit or restrain his political activities than he could limit theirs.

As a result, President Trump was entirely within his legal rights to give his acceptance speech from the South Lawn of the White House. And any members of the White House staff who may have assisted and supported the president on Thursday night also were in compliance with the Hatch Act.

Although the Hatch Act prohibits a wide swath of federal workers — including many of the individuals who work in the White House — from engaging in political activities while on duty or “in any room or building occupied,” the White House lawn is not such a room or building. Had Congress intended to extend Hatch Act restrictions to entire government installations or compounds, it could and would have said so.

In addition, there is a further exemption from the relevant Hatch Act restrictions for White House staff members whose work and responsibilities continue beyond normal working hours and while on travel — which includes many if not most of them. These individuals are permitted to engage in political activities while on duty and in a federal room or building, as long as “the costs associated with that political activity are not paid for by money derived from the Treasury of the United States.” The president has stated that the Republican National Committee would be picking up the tab for his White House event (and the fireworks afterwards).

Similarly, the attacks on Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for delivering a convention speech from Jerusalem, endorsing President Trump’s reelection, are similarly misplaced based on these same provisions. In addition to exempting senior White House staff from Hatch Act restrictions on political activities while on duty or in a federal building, Section 7324(b) of the Hatch Act also exempts federal officials who are confirmed by the Senate and who “determine[] policies to be pursued by the United States in relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.” This language includes, at a minimum, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and other members of the president’s cabinet.

Such officials cannot, of course, use their “official authority or influence” to affect an election’s result, but the State Department has made clear that Secretary Pompeo spoke in his private capacity from Israel, not as secretary. Consequently, his speech was entirely consistent with his legal and ethical responsibilities.

Indeed, to the extent that Secretary Pompeo’s critics claim that he has somehow acted unethically or improperly, even if not illegally, it is significant that Congress itself made clear, in the Hatch Act’s first section, that federal employees — which includes cabinet members — “should be encouraged to exercise fully, freely, and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and to the extent not expressly prohibited by law, their right to participate or to refrain from participating in the political processes of the Nation.” The Hatch Act is a technical law to be applied as far as it goes and no further.
 
President Trump disregards the law when he thinks he can get away with it, and he is ready with lots of high dollar lawyers to fight his case. He has more court cases than any other president. He is always running afoul of the law.

President Trump is guilty of fraud.

He defrauded the general public who responded to ads for his 'Trump University.' He charged people thousands of dollars to 'enroll,' but it wasn't really a university at all. There was no accreditation, no assignments, no tests, no degrees. Just a series of lectures. 'Students' were promised in-person lectures by Trump himself but that never occurred. The students were defrauded. It was really a big rip-off. They filed a big lawsuit over it. Trump hired a bunch of lawyers to fight it as he usually does when he defrauds people.

Then he won the election. He didn't want the bad PR of the court case playing out in the press as he prepared to take office, so he settled. He admitted he had no case. He paid off all the students. He had to pay $25 million to settle the case.

Then, to distract from the news that he settled the fraud case, he made a big Twitter stink about the Hamilton players appealing to VP-elect Pence for decency in government. This was a precursor for much of America into the way Trump operates and how he plays the media, works the news cycle to his advantage.

There is no substance to any credibility of Trump. It's all a facade. He is a crook who is adept at 'working the media.'

While I agree, Trump isn't the problem. Congress is the problem because they aren't doing anything about it. Trump started breaking laws as soon as he moved in and has largely been supported in doing so.

The political partisans on this forum often fail to see the long term consequences of breaking rules, laws, acts, etc. It sets a precedent for the next President or Congress to do too. 30 years of this shit and look where we are; Thanks Congress!

NSFW
4dg2vk.jpg
 
You keep repeating that same punkass bitch ass lie. You're such a BITCH....]
You should try to expand your vocabulary, Miss Begotten. You look like a 6th grade dropout when you keep using the same insults and rants. Try to step it up to a HS Senior level....if you can, please.
 
It is a crime to support terrorists (ANTIFA and BLM).

Attention Dementia Joe.

Wake up.

Logic failure. If BLM and Antifa are all terrorists, why aren't they being arrested by Trump's Storm Troopers?


4dg3s0.jpg
 
You keep repeating that same punkass bitch ass lie. You're such a BITCH.



"There was nothing unlawful or improper about Trump's acceptance speech"
https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...ul-or-improper-about-trumps-acceptance-speech

The talking heads and pundits attacking President Trump for giving his Republican National Convention acceptance speech from the White House lawn need to actually read the law. The Hatch Act is a precisely written statute — as is appropriate for a law that limits the indisputable First Amendment rights of federal workers — and it supports the president.

First and foremost, the Hatch Act explicitly exempts the president and vice president from its strictures. It defines “employee,” to which the Hatch Act’s restrictions apply, as someone “other than the President or Vice President.” This is constitutionally required because the president is a co-equal branch of the federal government and Congress can no more limit or restrain his political activities than he could limit theirs.

As a result, President Trump was entirely within his legal rights to give his acceptance speech from the South Lawn of the White House. And any members of the White House staff who may have assisted and supported the president on Thursday night also were in compliance with the Hatch Act.

Although the Hatch Act prohibits a wide swath of federal workers — including many of the individuals who work in the White House — from engaging in political activities while on duty or “in any room or building occupied,” the White House lawn is not such a room or building. Had Congress intended to extend Hatch Act restrictions to entire government installations or compounds, it could and would have said so.

In addition, there is a further exemption from the relevant Hatch Act restrictions for White House staff members whose work and responsibilities continue beyond normal working hours and while on travel — which includes many if not most of them. These individuals are permitted to engage in political activities while on duty and in a federal room or building, as long as “the costs associated with that political activity are not paid for by money derived from the Treasury of the United States.” The president has stated that the Republican National Committee would be picking up the tab for his White House event (and the fireworks afterwards).

Similarly, the attacks on Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for delivering a convention speech from Jerusalem, endorsing President Trump’s reelection, are similarly misplaced based on these same provisions. In addition to exempting senior White House staff from Hatch Act restrictions on political activities while on duty or in a federal building, Section 7324(b) of the Hatch Act also exempts federal officials who are confirmed by the Senate and who “determine[] policies to be pursued by the United States in relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.” This language includes, at a minimum, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and other members of the president’s cabinet.

Such officials cannot, of course, use their “official authority or influence” to affect an election’s result, but the State Department has made clear that Secretary Pompeo spoke in his private capacity from Israel, not as secretary. Consequently, his speech was entirely consistent with his legal and ethical responsibilities.

Indeed, to the extent that Secretary Pompeo’s critics claim that he has somehow acted unethically or improperly, even if not illegally, it is significant that Congress itself made clear, in the Hatch Act’s first section, that federal employees — which includes cabinet members — “should be encouraged to exercise fully, freely, and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and to the extent not expressly prohibited by law, their right to participate or to refrain from participating in the political processes of the Nation.” The Hatch Act is a technical law to be applied as far as it goes and no further.

Indeed.

You used language that even he can understand.
 
What, specifically, are Dem-controlled cities doing or not doing that Repug cities do? I mean using examples and statistics.

Why are there still riots and murders occurring in Portland after more than 80 days, whilst Kenosha was quelled after 3 days? The Dems are truly shooting themselves in the foot, it is Xmas come early for Trump!
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

While I agree, Trump isn't the problem. Congress is the problem because they aren't doing anything about it. Trump started breaking laws as soon as he moved in and has largely been supported in doing so.

The political partisans on this forum often fail to see the long term consequences of breaking rules, laws, acts, etc. It sets a precedent for the next President or Congress to do too. 30 years of this shit and look where we are; Thanks Congress!

NSFW
4dg2vk.jpg

It is really the American people who are to blame. Who put Congress there?
 
Why are there still riots and murders occurring in Portland after more than 80 days, whilst Kenosha was quelled after 3 days? The Dems are truly shooting themselves in the foot, it is Xmas come early for Trump!

Indeed.

A huuge (sic) miscalculation by the radical Democrats.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

It is really the American people who are to blame. Who put Congress there?

Agreed on that aspect. However, leaders are elected to lead. As a group they've failed. Mainly, IMO, because they put party before country. When We, the People vote, we're often given two main choices; A Democrat and a Republican. All of the Third Party voters on this forum are ridiculed by the partisans of both sides for "wasting their vote" by voting third party.

While I agree that the ultimate solution to our woes is in the hands of "We, the People", there are two main variables to consider: Abuse of the back half of the IQ Bell Curve by the top half through peer/social pressure to vote a certain way and the problem of a politician who makes promises s/he can't keep once elected.

I suspect the main reason Trump was elected was to shake Washington. That's done. Now We the People can do it again by voting Biden and, in 2024, a Republican. By always voting for the challenger, maybe We, the People can force change upon Washington, DC instead of Washington, DC forcing change on us.
 
Back
Top