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

[OKTexas]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

WOW, now you're trying to move the goal posts because you're getting your ass kicked. Good job commie, your deflection doesn't even warrant a response since it's COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC.

.

 

[colfax_m]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

WOW, now you're trying to move the goal posts because you're getting your ass kicked. Good job commie, your deflection doesn't even warrant a response since it's COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC.

.

Nope. It’s exactly on topic.

The title is call use of office for private gain.

Endorsement of a product provides that company with a gain.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

employee
[emˈploiē, emˌploiˈē]

NOUN

1. a person employed for wages or salary,

Doesn't apply to volunteers, dip.

.

I don't know where you got that definition, maybe a dictionary.

But the legal definition written in law says this:
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.

Thanks for the effort, dip. You're wrong again.

Wrong, you have to be an employee to have a pay or leave status. Where ever you got your poor education, you should ask for a refund.

.

Ivanka is an employee. Whether she is paid or not is irrelevant.

She said so herself:
“I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees.”

Ivanka Trump To Be An Official White House Employee Covered By Ethics Rules

She already has an office in the West Wing. "I have been working closely ... with the White House Counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role," she said.

www.npr.org

You’re about the third dumbass I’ve proven wrong at this point and y’all just run away without ever manning up and admitting it.

Your opinion isn't fact, actually it's more of a fantasy. LMAO

.

Im not giving you my opinion. I’m literally quoting Ivanka announcing that she’s a federal employee.

Can you respond to the quote from Ivanka?

The same damn article says she's not.

.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Of course you have a link that says volunteers are considered employees, RIGHT?

.

I can do you one better. I have Ivanka saying she's an employee.

"I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees."

Ivanka Trump To Be An Official White House Employee Covered By Ethics Rules

She already has an office in the West Wing. "I have been working closely ... with the White House Counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role," she said.

www.npr.org

From your link:

But she did not have to abide by ethics rules, which concerned many ethics experts who said it would allow her to skirt some rules and disclosures.

She also said she would voluntarily abide by ethics standards, that tells me she's not bound by them. You just shot yourself in the foot. A gal has a right to change her mind, RIGHT?

.

That was BEFORE she became an official employee.

Really, it said she already had an office, how does that happen?

.

Her dad got elected. What are you getting at?

You're the one that said she wasn't official then, but she had an office in the WH, how does that happen?

.

 

[colfax_m]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

employee
[emˈploiē, emˌploiˈē]

NOUN

1. a person employed for wages or salary,

Doesn't apply to volunteers, dip.

.

I don't know where you got that definition, maybe a dictionary.

But the legal definition written in law says this:
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.

Thanks for the effort, dip. You're wrong again.

Wrong, you have to be an employee to have a pay or leave status. Where ever you got your poor education, you should ask for a refund.

.

Ivanka is an employee. Whether she is paid or not is irrelevant.

She said so herself:
“I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees.”

Ivanka Trump To Be An Official White House Employee Covered By Ethics Rules

She already has an office in the West Wing. "I have been working closely ... with the White House Counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role," she said.

www.npr.org

You’re about the third dumbass I’ve proven wrong at this point and y’all just run away without ever manning up and admitting it.

Your opinion isn't fact, actually it's more of a fantasy. LMAO

.

Im not giving you my opinion. I’m literally quoting Ivanka announcing that she’s a federal employee.

Can you respond to the quote from Ivanka?

The same damn article says she's not.

.

It says she wasn’t an employee but after people criticized her for trying to evade the rules, she became an employee.

I swear, you guys are really shitty at reading.

 

[Nostra]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

You tell me...................






After that, tell me where your statute says "if the company benefits".

Probably.

Does the law we are talking about apply to the president?

You are claiming the law "probably" says "if the company benefits"????????????????????

Endorsing a company provides a gain to that company.

Is that covered under your statute? I didn't see it.

 

[colfax_m]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Of course you have a link that says volunteers are considered employees, RIGHT?

.

I can do you one better. I have Ivanka saying she's an employee.

"I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees."

Ivanka Trump To Be An Official White House Employee Covered By Ethics Rules

She already has an office in the West Wing. "I have been working closely ... with the White House Counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role," she said.

www.npr.org

From your link:

But she did not have to abide by ethics rules, which concerned many ethics experts who said it would allow her to skirt some rules and disclosures.

She also said she would voluntarily abide by ethics standards, that tells me she's not bound by them. You just shot yourself in the foot. A gal has a right to change her mind, RIGHT?

.

That was BEFORE she became an official employee.

Really, it said she already had an office, how does that happen?

.

Her dad got elected. What are you getting at?

You're the one that said she wasn't official then, but she had an office in the WH, how does that happen?

.

It happened because the Trump’s don’t think the rules apply to them. She tried to have an office in the WH without becoming an employee to evade responsibility. It failed.

 

[colfax_m]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

You tell me...................






After that, tell me where your statute says "if the company benefits".

Probably.

Does the law we are talking about apply to the president?

You are claiming the law "probably" says "if the company benefits"????????????????????

Endorsing a company provides a gain to that company.

Is that covered under your statute? I didn't see it.

Yes. Subsection c

 

[Nostra]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

WOW, now you're trying to move the goal posts because you're getting your ass kicked. Good job commie, your deflection doesn't even warrant a response since it's COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC.

.

Nope. It’s exactly on topic.

The title is call use of office for private gain.

Endorsement of a product provides that company with a gain.

Gonna be fun watching you spin this..............

Chuck Schumer endorses Junior's Cheesecake as "best ever". Clear violation of law.

Hey, colfax_m is Chuck exempt from the law prohibiting endorsing products too? Should we hold an unpaid "govt employee" to a higher standard than the Senate Minority Leader? Schumer confirms spending $8K on cheesecake in 10 years: 'Guilty as charged' Senate Minority Leader Charles...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[colfax_m]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

WOW, now you're trying to move the goal posts because you're getting your ass kicked. Good job commie, your deflection doesn't even warrant a response since it's COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC.

.

Nope. It’s exactly on topic.

The title is call use of office for private gain.

Endorsement of a product provides that company with a gain.

Gonna be fun watching you spin this..............

Chuck Schumer endorses Junior's Cheesecake as "best ever". Clear violation of law.

Hey, colfax_m is Chuck exempt from the law prohibiting endorsing products too? Should we hold an unpaid "govt employee" to a higher standard than the Senate Minority Leader? Schumer confirms spending $8K on cheesecake in 10 years: 'Guilty as charged' Senate Minority Leader Charles...

www.usmessageboard.com

Nope. The law covers executive branch, not Congress.

 

[Nostra]

This looks to be in the Capital building colfax_m

 

[Nostra]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

WOW, now you're trying to move the goal posts because you're getting your ass kicked. Good job commie, your deflection doesn't even warrant a response since it's COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC.

.

Nope. It’s exactly on topic.

The title is call use of office for private gain.

Endorsement of a product provides that company with a gain.

Gonna be fun watching you spin this..............

Chuck Schumer endorses Junior's Cheesecake as "best ever". Clear violation of law.

Hey, colfax_m is Chuck exempt from the law prohibiting endorsing products too? Should we hold an unpaid "govt employee" to a higher standard than the Senate Minority Leader? Schumer confirms spending $8K on cheesecake in 10 years: 'Guilty as charged' Senate Minority Leader Charles...

www.usmessageboard.com

Nope. The law covers executive branch, not Congress.

Ahhhh................so you went from "Govt employee" to "only the executive branch".

Care to quote where it is limited to the executive branch?

 

[Thinker101]

 

[OKTexas]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

WOW, now you're trying to move the goal posts because you're getting your ass kicked. Good job commie, your deflection doesn't even warrant a response since it's COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC.

.

Nope. It’s exactly on topic.

The title is call use of office for private gain.

Endorsement of a product provides that company with a gain.

Does it, you Trump haters are calling for a boycott of the company, I find that offensive, so you must now cancel yourself. LMAO

That said, the laws you cited don't apply to private companies or the topic in the OP, so yeah, it's off topic.

.

 

[Nostra]

Man, colfax_m is taking a major beating.

 

[colfax_m]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Right. She didn't gain. That's the point I keep making. Do you understand Goya didn't pay her? You don't, do you?

Hunter on the other hand got his daddy to redirect millions of dollars his way and you don't give a shit

The law specifically says they're not allowed to endorse any product regardless of personal gain.

You might want to sign up for a remedial reading class, that's not what the law says.

.

Yes, it does.
(c) Endorsements. An employee shall 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:

(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or

(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.

www.law.cornell.edu

Did you read the title of the law?

Use of public office for private gain.

ROFLMFAO, what do you fail to understand, there was no private gain, dip.

.

Does a company benefit from having celebrities endorse their product?

WOW, now you're trying to move the goal posts because you're getting your ass kicked. Good job commie, your deflection doesn't even warrant a response since it's COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC.

.

Nope. It’s exactly on topic.

The title is call use of office for private gain.

Endorsement of a product provides that company with a gain.

Gonna be fun watching you spin this..............

Chuck Schumer endorses Junior's Cheesecake as "best ever". Clear violation of law.

Hey, colfax_m is Chuck exempt from the law prohibiting endorsing products too? Should we hold an unpaid "govt employee" to a higher standard than the Senate Minority Leader? Schumer confirms spending $8K on cheesecake in 10 years: 'Guilty as charged' Senate Minority Leader Charles...

www.usmessageboard.com

Nope. The law covers executive branch, not Congress.

Ahhhh................so you went from "Govt employee" to "only the executive branch".

Care to quote where it is limited to the executive branch?

It’s in the definitions.

5 CFR § 2635.102 - Definitions.

www.law.cornell.edu

Read the definition of employee and tell me what you find.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

employee
[emˈploiē, emˌploiˈē]

NOUN

1. a person employed for wages or salary,

Doesn't apply to volunteers, dip.

.

I don't know where you got that definition, maybe a dictionary.

But the legal definition written in law says this:
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.

Thanks for the effort, dip. You're wrong again.

Wrong, you have to be an employee to have a pay or leave status. Where ever you got your poor education, you should ask for a refund.

.

Ivanka is an employee. Whether she is paid or not is irrelevant.

She said so herself:
“I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees.”

Ivanka Trump To Be An Official White House Employee Covered By Ethics Rules

She already has an office in the West Wing. "I have been working closely ... with the White House Counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role," she said.

www.npr.org

You’re about the third dumbass I’ve proven wrong at this point and y’all just run away without ever manning up and admitting it.

Your opinion isn't fact, actually it's more of a fantasy. LMAO

.

Im not giving you my opinion. I’m literally quoting Ivanka announcing that she’s a federal employee.

Can you respond to the quote from Ivanka?

The same damn article says she's not.

.

It says she wasn’t an employee but after people criticized her for trying to evade the rules, she became an employee.

I swear, you guys are really shitty at reading.

Feel free to point out what I might have missed.

.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

Experts: Ivanka Trump’s endorsement of Goya Foods puts her in serious legal trouble

“Clearly a Violation” Government ethics experts across the nation are denouncing Ivanka Trump’s late-night endorsement of Goya Foods as a violation of law – and ethics – especially as it comes just days after the company’s CEO appeared on national television in the Rose Garden of the White House...

www.rawstory.com

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.

Of course you have a link that says volunteers are considered employees, RIGHT?

.

I can do you one better. I have Ivanka saying she's an employee.

"I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees."

Ivanka Trump To Be An Official White House Employee Covered By Ethics Rules

She already has an office in the West Wing. "I have been working closely ... with the White House Counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role," she said.

www.npr.org

From your link:

But she did not have to abide by ethics rules, which concerned many ethics experts who said it would allow her to skirt some rules and disclosures.

She also said she would voluntarily abide by ethics standards, that tells me she's not bound by them. You just shot yourself in the foot. A gal has a right to change her mind, RIGHT?

.

That was BEFORE she became an official employee.

Really, it said she already had an office, how does that happen?

.

Her dad got elected. What are you getting at?

You're the one that said she wasn't official then, but she had an office in the WH, how does that happen?

.

It happened because the Trump’s don’t think the rules apply to them. She tried to have an office in the WH without becoming an employee to evade responsibility. It failed.

Really? Do tell.

.

 

[Thinker101]

Man, colfax_m is taking a major beating.

Wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[CowboyTed]

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.

In this case I have to agree. Nothing wrong with the Goya CEO liking Trump or visiting, a bit dicey that Trump's daughter is now doing spot ads promoting the company. But then, Hillary took actual donations from foreign countries to her "charity," then turned around and did them huge favors.

So once again, just follow the crumbs-- -- -- if the democrats don't like it, you can be sure they already did it themselves, did it far worse and did it first.

What company?
What favours?