Ivanka Trumps Endorsement Of Goya Foods Puts Her In Serious Legal Trouble

An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

I did read it, but perhaps you didn't. The red bolded part is the important phrase that everyone here keeps managing to avoid reading.

No, you didn't. The entire speaks about personal gain.


An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity,
Do none of you guys understand what commas mean?

It's a fucking list guys.

The entirety of the law concerns "personal gain". You're simply seeing what you want to see. The entire context of the law is prohibiting personal gain. Let's however revisit what you said.

Post where it says this : product regardless of personal gain.
I already posted it. I marked it in red. The entirety of the law does not concern personal gain. The part I marked does not.

Do you guys not understand that it is a list?

Then ability to comprehend is very low quality.Sorry son.
An employeeshall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office to endorse any product, service or enterprise except..
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.
Fucking dumb.
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.






What elected position does she have?


Oh, right. None.

Goodbye.
She’s a government employee which is exactly who the law covers.

Wrong, she is her dads advisor. She gets no pay.
Her pay is irrelevant. She is a government employee.

Not clicking with what an "employee" is, are you? She also wasn't paid for promoting Goya.

OK, so Obama was paid. And he promoted the Chevy Volt. What should have happened to him in your view?
She’s an employee. It doesn’t matter if she’s paid or not. She signed up as an employee. You can be an unpaid employee, kiddo. That doesn’t exempt one from ethics laws.

The president is specifically exempted from the law in question.

You're still only addressing half the equation and obviously doing it on purpose because you realize you're wrong.

If she were PAID by Goya, that would be an argument. She's benefiting from being an unpaid advisor.

But she's making nothing off any of this. That's where your argument falls apart, and you know it, which is why you're dancing and evading addressing the whole picture at once

§ 2635.702 Use of public office for private gain.
An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

She's not allowed to endorse products.
What gain did she have?

Context is beyond his abilities.

And reading comprehension seems to be beyond yours.

Sorry kid, the entire context is "personal gain".
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.






What elected position does she have?


Oh, right. None.

Goodbye.
She’s a government employee which is exactly who the law covers.

Wrong, she is her dads advisor. She gets no pay.
Her pay is irrelevant. She is a government employee.

Not clicking with what an "employee" is, are you? She also wasn't paid for promoting Goya.

OK, so Obama was paid. And he promoted the Chevy Volt. What should have happened to him in your view?
She’s an employee. It doesn’t matter if she’s paid or not. She signed up as an employee. You can be an unpaid employee, kiddo. That doesn’t exempt one from ethics laws.

The president is specifically exempted from the law in question.

You're still only addressing half the equation and obviously doing it on purpose because you realize you're wrong.

If she were PAID by Goya, that would be an argument. She's benefiting from being an unpaid advisor.

But she's making nothing off any of this. That's where your argument falls apart, and you know it, which is why you're dancing and evading addressing the whole picture at once

§ 2635.702 Use of public office for private gain.
An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

She's not allowed to endorse products.
What gain did she have?

Context is beyond his abilities.

And reading comprehension seems to be beyond yours.

Sorry kid, the entire context is "personal gain".

It’s not. If you had reading comprehension, you’d understand that. Read the whole thing and stop making it up.
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.






What elected position does she have?


Oh, right. None.

Goodbye.
She’s a government employee which is exactly who the law covers.

Wrong, she is her dads advisor. She gets no pay.
Her pay is irrelevant. She is a government employee.

Not clicking with what an "employee" is, are you? She also wasn't paid for promoting Goya.

OK, so Obama was paid. And he promoted the Chevy Volt. What should have happened to him in your view?
She’s an employee. It doesn’t matter if she’s paid or not. She signed up as an employee. You can be an unpaid employee, kiddo. That doesn’t exempt one from ethics laws.

The president is specifically exempted from the law in question.

You're still only addressing half the equation and obviously doing it on purpose because you realize you're wrong.

If she were PAID by Goya, that would be an argument. She's benefiting from being an unpaid advisor.

But she's making nothing off any of this. That's where your argument falls apart, and you know it, which is why you're dancing and evading addressing the whole picture at once

§ 2635.702 Use of public office for private gain.
An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

She's not allowed to endorse products.
What gain did she have?

Context is beyond his abilities.

And reading comprehension seems to be beyond yours.

Sorry kid, the entire context is "personal gain".

No genius, the section of the clause reads, "for the endorsement of any product, service, or enterprise".....
Meaning, when you are a government employee or affiliated with the government, you CAN'T endorse any product or service...period..end of story.

Not sure why you and the other members of the Trump Family Apologist are getting your panties in a bunch over this? First off, it's not like the Trump family
or administration has any ethical morality. Kellyann Conway pimped Ivanka's clothing line and got a slap on the wrist for it. We know the Trumps are above the law.
And you can't tell me with the Trump family pedigree that ANY of them have ever gone near a piece of food that had a Goya product in it. :)
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.






What elected position does she have?


Oh, right. None.

Goodbye.
She’s a government employee which is exactly who the law covers.
/—-/ Read it and weep, Loser: Ivanka 'may have violated government ethics rules' for promoting Goya foods after CEO said US is 'blessed to have Trump'
What am I supposed to weep about? This article confirms what I've been saying.
/——/ It happens often and nothing will become of it. Or did you not see that?
It happens often in this administration and nothing is done about it because this administration doesn't give a shit about the law.
What law have they broken?
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.
Put the pos in jail
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.

Watch: Six Years Ago Obama Promised to Buy a Chevy Volt. Now It Is Dead

Yeah, but remember how the Democrats all wanted him investigated for that? Hmm ... I don't either ...

They will say as an elected official he isn't beholden to those rules. Of course, Trump's daughter isn't a civil service employee of the government, so her application vis a vis the law is probably hazy as well.

They got their soundbite, that's all they care about.
Yes. Ivanka is an employee of the government.

A civil servant with a title?
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.

Watch: Six Years Ago Obama Promised to Buy a Chevy Volt. Now It Is Dead

Yeah, but remember how the Democrats all wanted him investigated for that? Hmm ... I don't either ...

They will say as an elected official he isn't beholden to those rules. Of course, Trump's daughter isn't a civil service employee of the government, so her application vis a vis the law is probably hazy as well.

They got their soundbite, that's all they care about.
Yes. Ivanka is an employee of the government.

A civil servant with a title?
I believe her title is special advisor to the president.
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.
TDS lol
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.

Watch: Six Years Ago Obama Promised to Buy a Chevy Volt. Now It Is Dead

Yeah, but remember how the Democrats all wanted him investigated for that? Hmm ... I don't either ...

They will say as an elected official he isn't beholden to those rules. Of course, Trump's daughter isn't a civil service employee of the government, so her application vis a vis the law is probably hazy as well.

They got their soundbite, that's all they care about.
Yes. Ivanka is an employee of the government.

A civil servant with a title?
I believe her title is special advisor to the president.

Paid? Civil Service? Senate Confirmed?
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.






What elected position does she have?


Oh, right. None.

Goodbye.
She’s a government employee which is exactly who the law covers.
/—-/ Read it and weep, Loser: Ivanka 'may have violated government ethics rules' for promoting Goya foods after CEO said US is 'blessed to have Trump'
What am I supposed to weep about? This article confirms what I've been saying.
/——/ It happens often and nothing will become of it. Or did you not see that?
It happens often in this administration and nothing is done about it because this administration doesn't give a shit about the law.
What law have they broken?
Cited in the OP.
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.

Watch: Six Years Ago Obama Promised to Buy a Chevy Volt. Now It Is Dead

Yeah, but remember how the Democrats all wanted him investigated for that? Hmm ... I don't either ...

They will say as an elected official he isn't beholden to those rules. Of course, Trump's daughter isn't a civil service employee of the government, so her application vis a vis the law is probably hazy as well.

They got their soundbite, that's all they care about.
Yes. Ivanka is an employee of the government.

A civil servant with a title?
I believe her title is special advisor to the president.

Paid? Civil Service? Senate Confirmed?
No. No. No.

Any other questions?
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.
Put the pos in jail
/——/ As soon as you put these two POS in prison of the same reason.
5C195074-5A8A-4739-BB53-5772C7D7011A.jpeg
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.

Watch: Six Years Ago Obama Promised to Buy a Chevy Volt. Now It Is Dead

Yeah, but remember how the Democrats all wanted him investigated for that? Hmm ... I don't either ...

They will say as an elected official he isn't beholden to those rules. Of course, Trump's daughter isn't a civil service employee of the government, so her application vis a vis the law is probably hazy as well.

They got their soundbite, that's all they care about.
Yes. Ivanka is an employee of the government.

A civil servant with a title?
I believe her title is special advisor to the president.

Paid? Civil Service? Senate Confirmed?
No. No. No.

Any other questions?

The law they are quoting probably applies to a specific type of employee. Any idea which one it applies to?
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.

Watch: Six Years Ago Obama Promised to Buy a Chevy Volt. Now It Is Dead

Yeah, but remember how the Democrats all wanted him investigated for that? Hmm ... I don't either ...

They will say as an elected official he isn't beholden to those rules. Of course, Trump's daughter isn't a civil service employee of the government, so her application vis a vis the law is probably hazy as well.

They got their soundbite, that's all they care about.
Yes. Ivanka is an employee of the government.

A civil servant with a title?
I believe her title is special advisor to the president.

Paid? Civil Service? Senate Confirmed?
No. No. No.

Any other questions?

The law they are quoting probably applies to a specific type of employee. Any idea which one it applies to?

It applies to almost everyone in government:
(h) Employee means any officer or employee of an agency, including a special Government employee. It includes officers but not enlisted members of the uniformed services. It includes employees of a State or local government or other organization who are serving on detail to an agency, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3371, et seq. For purposes other than subparts B and C of this part, it does not include the President or Vice President. Status as an employee is unaffected by pay or leave status or, in the case of a special Government employee, by the fact that the individual does not perform official duties on a given day.
 
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.
/----/ Ivanka is a private citizen, but Obozo was president when he endorsed the Chevy Volt. Watch: Six Years Ago Obama Promised to Buy a Chevy Volt. Now It Is Dead

Why in the hell is a private citizen allowed access to secret information? whatever security clearance she supposed to have should be investigated.


You're not opposed to private citizens having access to classified info, just a few in this administration. That makes you a fucking hypocrite. But tell the class what has been done to warrant an investigation.

.
 
Last edited:
Ms. Trump’s Goya tweet is clearly a violation of the government’s misuse of position regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702. Ms. Trump has had ethics training. She knows better. But she did it anyway because no one in this administration cares about government ethics,” Shaub says.
I just love it when you know nothing assholes are shown up for the loud mouthed know nothing assholes you are. Trouble is you make a habit of it so everyone already knows you're full of shit.

“Thank you to @ivankatrump for providing me with a picture/anecdote to use in my anti-corruption class this fall to demonstrate a flagrant violation of federal ethics laws,” said Jessica Tillipman, an Assistant Dean for Field Placement and Professorial Lecturer in Law at George Washington University Law School.

Congratulations Ivanka on your new forever home. May you find a home in anti corruption classes world wide, which I'm sure you will. :auiqs.jpg:


ROFLMAO, Ivanka isn't a government employee. It's amazing people pay to sit in a classroom with that bitch.

.

.
 
An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

I did read it, but perhaps you didn't. The red bolded part is the important phrase that everyone here keeps managing to avoid reading.

No, you didn't. The entire speaks about personal gain.


An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity,
Do none of you guys understand what commas mean?

It's a fucking list guys.

The entirety of the law concerns "personal gain". You're simply seeing what you want to see. The entire context of the law is prohibiting personal gain. Let's however revisit what you said.

Post where it says this : product regardless of personal gain.
I already posted it. I marked it in red. The entirety of the law does not concern personal gain. The part I marked does not.

Do you guys not understand that it is a list?

Then ability to comprehend is very low quality.Sorry son.
An employeeshall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office to endorse any product, service or enterprise except..
You conveniently edited out this portion, you lying POS.

An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain,
 

Forum List

Back
Top