Stora tråden om amerikansk inrikespolitik

seeeg321 skrev

Som sagt 9th circuit har fått nästan 90% av sina domar upphävda av högsta domstolen, vilket kommer hända även denna gång.

Problemet är att man till slut bara har högsta domstolen som följer lagen medan de andra dömer efter politik vilket inte är bra och kan leda till krig.

This is day two of the Trump administration’s dispute with Nordstrom, the department-store chain that has stopped carrying Ivanka Trump’s clothing line because of poor sales. On Wednesday, Trump tweeted an attack on Nordstrom from his personal Twitter account, then retweeted it from his @POTUS account. His hapless press secretary, Sean Spicer, defended Trump’s conduct, saying that Nordstrom’s refusal to sell the president’s daughter’s fashion line was “a direct attack on his policies and her name.” This morning, Kellyanne Conway appeared on Fox and Friends and urged viewers: “Go buy Ivanka’s stuff … I’m going to give a free commercial here. Go buy it today, everybody; you can find it online.”

All of this was a shameful farce, but only Conway’s comments appear to be illegal. Federal ethics law for administrative employees says this:

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.
There is simply no question that Conway was endorsing Ivanka Trump’s product.

Japhy skrev

Här måste jag säga att Trump går över gränsen. Hans kommentar kan i värsta fall leda till att klädkedjan går i konkurs. Skärpning krävs. Fri företagsamhet kräver att presidenten vare sig gynnar eller missgynnar företag, som har självklar rätt att köpa och sälja vad fan de vill.