Kellyanne says Americans should 'go buy Ivanka's stuff' in White House interview

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

a couple of off-the-cuff remarks hardly passes the smell test for violating the original intent of the law.

Some of you would bitch if they hung you with a brand new rope.

I agree, I was just puzzled as to why Kellyanne would go out of her way to tout Ivanka's clothing line. Pretty bizarre IMO.

[DCPatriot]

I agree, I was just puzzled as to why Kellyanne would go out of her way to tout Ivanka's clothing line. Pretty bizarre IMO.

LOL!  It was like while doing the interview, she threw the tennis ball and the dog (media) chased after it.

And Ivanka gets free publicity.

[txradioguy]

LOL!  It was like while doing the interview, she threw the tennis ball and the dog (media) chased after it.

And Ivanka gets free publicity.

And Conway gets in trouble with ethics laws.

But i guess as long as she works for Trump it's ok right?

[Cripplecreek]

And Conway gets in trouble with ethics laws.

But i guess as long as she works for Trump it's ok right?

The house ethics committee is calling for disciplinary action.

Make that the house oversight committee is asking the ethics committee for a review

[endicom]

How many First Lardies have helped tout the designers who tent them?

[Frank Cannon]

I agree, I was just puzzled as to why Kellyanne would go out of her way to tout Ivanka's clothing line. Pretty bizarre IMO.

Because people are fed up with only the boycotters side getting air play and the boycottee being treated as guilty no matter what.

[kevindavis007]

The Republican led House Ethics Committee is recommending disciplinary action.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/318820-chaffetz-cummings-call-on-ethics-office-to-hand-down-disciplinary

Had someone from a Dem administration, everyone of us would be screaming that the person deserved to be fired.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Because people are fed up with only the boycotters side getting air play and the boycottee being treated as guilty no matter what.

Boycotting Ivanka is BS IMO, still isn't the President or KAC's business to talk about it.

[Cripplecreek]

Had someone from a Dem administration, everyone of us would be screaming that the person deserved to be fired.

At least some of us aren't hypocrites.

[Fantom]

In my book, when the question becomes transformed into a political operation..... I.E. the fascist lefts attempt to destroy President Trump and all opposition really. At that point what She did is no longer a ethical violation.. and "endorsement" as it is a engagement in the active political sphere... she is calling for a buycott... to oppose the fascist lefts boycott.

Perfectly  fine. Does not violate the ethics law.

[DCPatriot]

The house ethics committee is calling for disciplinary action.

Make that the house oversight committee is asking the ethics committee for a review

Well, I'm sure Attorney General Sessions will consider "intent" before deciding if any investigation is worthy.     

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Spicer resents the implication that the Trump administration is trying to push ivanka's clothing line:

[Oceander]

Well, I'm sure Attorney General Sessions will consider "intent" before deciding if any investigation is worthy.     

So he'll show his true, corrupt, nature early then.

[DCPatriot]

So he'll show his true, corrupt, nature early then.

Not at all!   You're all being shrill!

It was a harmless playful plug and a kick in the balls to the boycotters, which became the internet rage for 24 hours and counting.

[txradioguy]

Well, I'm sure Attorney General Sessions will consider "intent" before deciding if any investigation is worthy.     

Not under his purview IIRC...its strictly a House matter.

Interesting though you seem to think he'd sweep it under the rug if he was able to investigate it.

[mrclose]

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/kellyanne-conway-broke-law-promote/2017/02/09/id/772788/
Ex-Obama Official: Conway Broke Law by Promoting Ivanka's Line

Conflict Of Interest(s)


All this outrage from the Dems (And some Repugs) over Kellyanne Conway's promotion of Ivanka Trumps clothing line leaves me to wondering .. Where was the outrage over 'this'?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6CZ5DLIV9I&feature=youtu.be

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

So you are advocating that "two wrongs *DO* make a right."

I'm here say that is wrong.

If we eliminated "yeah but what about..." posts here at GBR you'd basically eliminate 50% of the site content at this point.


Hypocrisy is rank on both sides.

[Cripplecreek]

If we eliminated "yeah but what about..." posts here at GBR you'd basically eliminate 50% of the site content at this point.


Hypocrisy is rank on both sides.

I overheard two waitresses on a break in the next booth talking about Trump yesterday. One waitress told the other that she's starting to feel like she's being forced to defend the indefensible because she doesn't want people to think she's a liberal.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I overheard two waitresses on a break in the next booth talking about Trump yesterday. One waitress told the other that she's starting to feel like she's being forced to defend the indefensible because she doesn't want people to think she's a liberal.

You see that here, calling everyone you don't agree with a "liberal", shouting down certain sources, etc.


And of course, whataboutism.


I bet there are plenty here that keep their mouth shut here because they don't want to be called a liberal/snowflake, etc.


Not that I care, the loudest screamers are almost always the dumbest and that includes here too.

[mrclose]

So you are advocating that "two wrongs *DO* make a right."

I'm here say that is wrong.

No!

I am asking why there was No Outrage from Dims OR Repugs just as my post asked!

I wasn't using that tired and worn out "Two Wrongs Don't Make A Right" leftist argument to justify anything!

For instance .. If Obama robs a bank and the law doesn't care ... Why should an arrest be made if Trump robs the same bank?

It's the "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" that I'm interested in .. You know, the FAIRNESS of it all pushed by the LEFT!

That clear it up for you?

[mrclose]

If we eliminated "yeah but what about..." posts here at GBR you'd basically eliminate 50% of the site content at this point.


Hypocrisy is rank on both sides.

It would help if dishonest posters wouldn't steer the original question off into the "GOTTCHA" direction!

[r9etb]

For instance .. If Obama robs a bank and the law doesn't care ... Why should an arrest be made if Trump robs the same bank?

It's the "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" that I'm interested in .. You know, the FAIRNESS of it all pushed by the LEFT!

That clear it up for you?

Nope.  You're basically saying that if Obama doesn't get arrested for robbery, then Trump shouldn't, either. 

The idea that both ought to be arrested, apparently does not enter into your example.

[geronl]

Nope.  You're basically saying that if Obama doesn't get arrested for robbery, then Trump shouldn't, either. 

The idea that both ought to be arrested, apparently does not enter into your example.

 

[mrclose]

Nope.  You're basically saying that if Obama doesn't get arrested for robbery, then Trump shouldn't, either. 

The idea that both ought to be arrested, apparently does not enter into your example.

That's some real twisting you have going on there!

[r9etb]

That's some real twisting you have going on there!

So, what are you really saying, then?