What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Razgovory]

Puerto Rico needs to be a state.  This bullshit would not happen if they had two voting Senators.

[Sophie Scholl]

Well the Hatch Act is a law too.  It prohibits using public property for partisan political purposes.  Yet we still had this "because TRUMP"

You are aware that the Hatch Act specifically excludes the President and Vice President and all members of the Executive Office of the President, right? 

We absolutely have seen people inside the US Government refuse to break the law on behalf of Trump.  But we've seen others who have not.

Who have we seen actually agree to break the law "because TRUMP?"

"~In June 2017, the OSC issued a warning to White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications Dan Scavino Jr. for an April 2017 tweet that Scavino sent advocating for a primary challenge against U.S. Representative Justin Amash.

~In October 2017, the OSC issued a warning to United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley over a June 2017 tweet that she retweeted from President Donald Trump endorsing Republican Congressional candidate Ralph Norman.

~In November 2017, former Office of Government Ethics head Walter Shaub filed a complaint against White House counselor Kellyanne Conway charging that her opposition to Roy Moore opponent Doug Jones during a segment on Fox and Friends violated the Hatch Act.[49] In March 2018, the OSC announced that Conway violated the Hatch Act on that occasion and one other.

~In September 2018, the OSC issued a warning letter to Stephanie Grisham, the Press Secretary and Communications Director for the First Lady of the United States, for violating the act by including Trump's campaign slogan in a post on her government Twitter account.

~In November 2018, the OSC ruled that six Trump administration officials violated the Hatch Act in posts to their government Twitter accounts, but declined to take disciplinary action. The OSC warned the officials—Raj Shah, deputy press secretary; Jessica Ditto, deputy director of communications; Madeleine Westerhout, executive assistant to the president; Helen Aguirre Ferré, former director of media affairs; Alyssa Farah, press secretary for the vice president; and Jacob Wood, deputy communications director of the Office of Management and Budget—that future infractions would be interpreted as willful violations subject to further action.

~In June 2019, the OSC sent a letter to President Trump recommending that White House counselor Kellyanne Conway be removed from federal service for repeatedly violating the Hatch Act. This report follows the March 2018 OSC finding that Conway was a "repeat offender" for disparaging Democratic presidential candidates while in her official capacity during televised interviews and on social media. President Trump, when asked at a press conference, stated he thought the provision violated her free speech rights.

~In August 2020, President Trump announced that, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, and the move of the 2020 Republican National Convention to a largely online format, he would make his speech accepting the Republican Party nomination for the presidential election from the South Lawn of the White House. In response, the OSC sent a letter to President Trump indicating that, while both the President and Vice-President are not covered by the terms of the Hatch Act, White House staffers are, and would therefore not be able to assist with such an address. Moreover, other portions of the Convention included clips recorded at the White House (e.g. an interview with freed hostages, and a naturalization ceremony). While Republicans argued that the South Lawn forms part of the President's residence, and therefore should not be classed as part of a federal building, legal experts point out that "t's still illegal under the Hatch Act for any White House staffer to participate in executing a campaign photo op/video segment in the White House". This could also lead to investigations for staffers that may have aided Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (but not Pompeo himself) in his convention activities as he delivered a speech while on official business in Jerusalem."

But it never happened and no one has violated it, right? Just because no one has been punished for it doesn't mean no one has violated the Hatch Act.

[grumbler]

If the best anyone can come up with is a list of dubious violations of the Hatch Act (which, we will recall, explicitly does not prohibit political activities by members of the Executive Office of the president, like Kellyanne Conway) and one pretty clear one (use of material prepared by non-members of the EOP in the White House convention presentation), then I think that we can say that there is no evidence whatsoever that people are willing to openly defy the law for the sake of Trump.

Oh, and BA, it is intellectually dishonest to copypasta Wikipedia articles without attribution.

[Eddie Teach]

The italics generally suggest it's a quote.

[grumbler]

The italics generally suggest it's a quote.

But virtually his entire post is a copy-n-paste job without attribution, not just the italicized part (which actually looks like accidental italics caused by the sloppiness of the CnP - note that the "i" in the first "it" was surrounded by [ ] on the wiki page, which became italics here).

[Sophie Scholl]

grumbler, I really can't wait for you to mysteriously stop posting one day. 

[Eddie Teach]

He'll outlive us all.

[Sophie Scholl]

I didn't realize I was going for a professional paper here in the Hallowed Halls of Languish. The style and the quotes I figured would be enough to suggest without  linking, dating, and proper footnoting for you. Also, you are wrong about who the Hatch Act applies to, so kindly fuck off with your bullshit.

"Except for the President and Vice President, all federal civilian executive branch employees are covered by the Hatch Act, including employees of the U.S. Postal Service. Even part-time employees are covered by the Act, and all employees continue to be covered while on annual leave, sick leave, leave without pay, or furlough. However, employees who work on an occasional or irregular basis, or who are special government employees, as defined in title 18 U.S.C. § 202(a), are subject to the restrictions only when they are engaged in government business. Federal employees fall within two categories under the Hatch Act, Further Restricted and Less Restricted.​"
(https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct-Federal.aspx Accessed 9/19/2020 at 9:18 PM)

In case you're thinking that "However, employees who work on an occasional or irregular basis, or who are special government employees, as defined in title 18 U.S.C. § 202(a)" makes you correct with your prior assertion, here is what that exception entails:

"For the purpose of sections 203, 205, 207, 208, and 209 of this title the term "special Government employee" shall mean an officer or employee of the executive or legislative branch of the United States Government, of any independent agency of the United States or of the District of Columbia, who is retained, designated, appointed, or employed to perform, with or without compensation, for not to exceed one hundred and thirty days during any period of three hundred and sixty-five consecutive days, temporary duties either on a full-time or intermittent basis, a part-time United States commissioner, a part-time United States magistrate judge, or, regardless of the number of days of appointment, an independent counsel appointed under chapter 40 of title 28 and any person appointed by that independent counsel under section 594(c) of title 28. Notwithstanding the next preceding sentence, every person serving as a part-time local representative of a Member of Congress in the Member's home district or State shall be classified as a special Government employee. Notwithstanding section 29(c) and (d) [1] of the Act of August 10, 1956 (70A Stat. 632; 5 U.S.C. 30r(c) and (d)), a Reserve officer of the Armed Forces, or an officer of the National Guard of the United States, unless otherwise an officer or employee of the United States, shall be classified as a special Government employee while on active duty solely for training. A Reserve officer of the Armed Forces or an officer of the National Guard of the United States who is voluntarily serving a period of extended active duty in excess of one hundred and thirty days shall be classified as an officer of the United States within the meaning of section 203 and sections 205 through 209 and 218. A Reserve officer of the Armed Forces or an officer of the National Guard of the United States who is serving involuntarily shall be classified as a special Government employee. The terms "officer or employee" and "special Government employee" as used in sections 203, 205, 207 through 209, and 218, shall not include enlisted members of the Armed Forces."

(https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/202 Accessed 9/19/2020 at 9:25 PM)

This means Kellyanne Conway and others have been in violation of the Hatch Act as per the United States Office of Special Counsel. Which you would know if you read the list above. Or did any research on it instead of just being a pedantic piece of shit like usual. No one is scoring for points in the debate of our current reality by getting off on rules technicalities and clever use of technique. I know that is your default mode of discussion, but I am beyond sick of it.

[DGuller]

If grumbler were going to die one day, you'd think it would've happened by now.

[grumbler]

grumbler, I really can't wait for you to mysteriously stop posting one day. 

And I can't wait for you to  one day concede that you are ashamed of your intellectually dishonesty.

Don't worry, I'll keep pointing it out until that day comes.

[grumbler]

BA, you should try to focus your quotes on those that support an argument.  It is good to see you noting sources, though.

5 U.S. Code § 7324 states that

(b)
(1)An employee described in paragraph (2) of this subsection may engage in political activity otherwise prohibited by subsection (a) if the costs associated with that political activity are not paid for by money derived from the Treasury of the United States.

(2)Paragraph (1) applies to an employee—

(A)the duties and responsibilities of whose position continue outside normal duty hours and while away from the normal duty post; and

(B)who is—

(i)an employee paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President; or

(ii)an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/7324

Kellyanne Conway was a Councilor to the President, and so paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President.  She can engage in political activity.  If the argument is that her actions don't meet the standard of "the costs associated with that political activity are not paid for by money derived from the Treasury of the United States," then, yes, it is possibly a technical violation of the Hatch Act.  Should she have been fired?  Sure, but not for this!  This is petty crap compared to the treasonous lies she spewed out on topics other than partisan politics.

[grumbler]

If grumbler were going to die one day, you'd think it would've happened by now.

That will be true until it isn't.

[Razgovory]

A Canadian was arrested for sending Ricin to the President.  Since the arrest was made CC has not been heard.

[Zoupa]

It was a woman

[Maximus]

If what I read was correct, she was arrested trying to cross the border with a gun. At least she was committed if not very clever.