• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donald Trump Names Son-in-Law Jared Kushner as Senior Adviser

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
As expected I think.
It was already going to be near impossible not to have some conflicts of interest.
Now throw in Kushner who has his own Real Estate mini-Empire, as well as being married to DJTs princess.
A month ago the WSJ suggested that Trump just sell everything/Divest/Cash out, and that there was no other way. They may be right

Donald Trump Names Son-in-Law Jared Kushner as Senior Adviser
One of the most influential voices in the Trump camp to get a wide-ranging portfolio
By PETER NICHOLAS and DAMIAN PALETTA
Updated Jan. 9, 2017 - 2:46 p.m. ET
Donald Trump Names Son-in-Law Jared Kushner as Senior Adviser - WSJ

President-elect Donald Trump is hiring son-in-law Jared Kushner as a senior adviser with a wide-ranging portfolio, a person familiar with the matter said, bringing to the West Wing one of the most influential figures in the Trump camp. Mr. Kushner, who turns 36 on Tuesday, has played a large role in Mr. Trump’s transition, helping to select top-ranking staff and set strategy, transition advisers said. Mr. Trump’s team has long wanted to bring him to the White House, but saw a potential obstacle in a 1967 anti-nepotism law.

In hiring Mr. Kushner, the Trump team has apparently concluded the appointment doesn't violate the law.
Mr. Kushner’s attorney, Jamie Gorelick, said Monday Mr. Kushner would take several steps to avoid conflicts of interest upon entering the White House. Ms. Gorelick, an attorney with the firm WilmerHale and a former U.S. deputy attorney general, said Mr. Kushner would resign from his position as chief executive of real estate developer Kushner Companies, as well as from his position at the New York Observer, a newspaper he owns.
[......]
 
As expected I think.
It was already going to be near impossible not to have some conflicts of interest.
Now throw in Kushner who has his own Real Estate mini-Empire, as well as being married to DJTs princess.
A month ago the WSJ suggested that Trump just sell everything/Divest/Cash out, and that there was no other way. They may be right

Donald Trump Names Son-in-Law Jared Kushner as Senior Adviser
One of the most influential voices in the Trump camp to get a wide-ranging portfolio
By PETER NICHOLAS and DAMIAN PALETTA
Updated Jan. 9, 2017 - 2:46 p.m. ET
Donald Trump Names Son-in-Law Jared Kushner as Senior Adviser - WSJ

Mr. Kushner’s attorney, Jamie Gorelick, said Monday Mr. Kushner would take several steps to avoid conflicts of interest upon entering the White House. Ms. Gorelick, an attorney with the firm WilmerHale and a former U.S. deputy attorney general, said Mr. Kushner would resign from his position as chief executive of real estate developer Kushner Companies, as well as from his position at the New York Observer, a newspaper he owns.

What's bizarre to me is the assumption, perhaps based in the law although I have no idea, that resigning from management but retaining ownership interests somehow mitigates the large conflicts of interest.

It's like, "I'm going to do this thing that I have to do because I can't run several companies and work full time in the WH, and you will applaud me for avoiding conflicts of interest, while my financial health is still intimately tied to the success of those businesses I temporarily stepped down from but will return to in a year or two...." :roll:

I'm indifferent to him as advisor, but the conflict of interest stuff is just amazing to me.
 
Trump probably has figured out that the left will be outraged no matter what he does or who he picks, so he might as well do what he wants.
 
I'm not totally against this. Trump trusts him and sometimes you need someone you trust to bounce things off of.
 
Trump probably has figured out that the left will be outraged no matter what he does or who he picks, so he might as well do what he wants.

Here, let me help you:

View attachment 67212195

What positions has Mr. Kushner held that allow him to be a top adviser to a president?

Don't worry, I'll wait to hear about your VAST knowledge on a guy who you hadn't heard of a few months ago.
 
Trump probably has figured out that the left will be outraged no matter what he does or who he picks, so he might as well do what he wants.

If only Obama had figured that out about the right to begin with :lol:
 
As expected I think.
It was already going to be near impossible not to have some conflicts of interest.
Now throw in Kushner who has his own Real Estate mini-Empire, as well as being married to DJTs princess.
A month ago the WSJ suggested that Trump just sell everything/Divest/Cash out, and that there was no other way. They may be right

Donald Trump Names Son-in-Law Jared Kushner as Senior Adviser
One of the most influential voices in the Trump camp to get a wide-ranging portfolio
By PETER NICHOLAS and DAMIAN PALETTA
Updated Jan. 9, 2017 - 2:46 p.m. ET
Donald Trump Names Son-in-Law Jared Kushner as Senior Adviser - WSJ

I'm disappointed in this pick if only because I wanted him for Supreme Court.
 
I'm disappointed in this pick if only because I wanted him for Supreme Court.

You wanted a guy that isn't even a lawyer to be on the Supreme Court?
 
Trump probably has figured out that the left will be outraged no matter what he does or who he picks, so he might as well do what he wants.

Trump doesn't have to do any figuring at all to do what he wants. And whether the left is outraged or not doesn't matter. But why does the right condone this blatant nepotism? Why do you? What's that trust-fund baby bringing to the table that counters the perception of graft?
 
You wanted a guy that isn't even a lawyer to be on the Supreme Court?

Don't get your fingers too close to a troll's mouth while you're feeding it.
 
Here, let me help you:

View attachment 67212195

What positions has Mr. Kushner held that allow him to be a top adviser to a president?

Don't worry, I'll wait to hear about your VAST knowledge on a guy who you hadn't heard of a few months ago.
I don't have VAST knowledge of any of his appointments and neither do you. What I do know is that liberals like you are going to be whining about everything the guys does for the next 4-8 years. The smart move is for him to ignore the crybabies on the left and appoint who he wants
 
Trump doesn't have to do any figuring at all to do what he wants. And whether the left is outraged or not doesn't matter. But why does the right condone this blatant nepotism? Why do you? What's that trust-fund baby bringing to the table that counters the perception of graft?

I'm sorry, did 'the right condone it?' Or did you just make that up?
 
What's bizarre to me is the assumption, perhaps based in the law although I have no idea, that resigning from management but retaining ownership interests somehow mitigates the large conflicts of interest.

It's like, "I'm going to do this thing that I have to do because I can't run several companies and work full time in the WH, and you will applaud me for avoiding conflicts of interest, while my financial health is still intimately tied to the success of those businesses I temporarily stepped down from but will return to in a year or two...." :roll:

I'm indifferent to him as advisor, but the conflict of interest stuff is just amazing to me.

What I find interesting is that the Son-In-Law is willing to do what it takes to remove any conflict of interest, yet trump is not. Yes, this all going to be interesting, notice I did not say fun.
 
Jared Kushner, the guy who's been a Democrat for his entire adult life, who donated dozens of thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates, who counts uber-Liberal Cory Booker as one of his closest friends. Yup, sounds about right.
 
Jared Kushner, the guy who's been a Democrat for his entire adult life, who donated dozens of thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates, who counts uber-Liberal Cory Booker as one of his closest friends. Yup, sounds about right.

Mmmmhm.
 
Jared Kushner, the guy who's been a Democrat for his entire adult life, who donated dozens of thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates, who counts uber-Liberal Cory Booker as one of his closest friends. Yup, sounds about right.

You don't think this was done because Trump is a liberal, right? The guy rose to power on the backs of solid conservative/Libertarian material like American, ocean515, countryboy, TurtleDude and apdst.
 
You don't think this was done because Trump is a liberal, right? The guy rose to power on the backs of solid conservative/Libertarian material like American, ocean515, countryboy, TurtleDude and apdst.

The guy rose to power on his ability to dupe the (apparently) easily duped.
 
What's bizarre to me is the assumption, perhaps based in the law although I have no idea, that resigning from management but retaining ownership interests somehow mitigates the large conflicts of interest.

So let's assume Kushner doesn't become a "senior advisor" and just talks to Trump at the dinner table or on the golf course. Short of banning The Donald from visiting his daughter and son-in-law, how would you prevent potential conflicts of interest? And, really, who's more likely to be influenced anyway? The billionaire who becomes a politician, or the politician who wants to become a billionaire?
 
What is the big difference in what Trump is doing with his Son in Law than say a president who appoints his wife, who has no medical training, as a top advisor in reforming Health Care?
 
The billionare owes at least a billion (3x more than he admitted) and His son-in -law has conflicts of interest of his own, let alone Trump's troubles.
 
So let's assume Kushner doesn't become a "senior advisor" and just talks to Trump at the dinner table or on the golf course. Short of banning The Donald from visiting his daughter and son-in-law, how would you prevent potential conflicts of interest? And, really, who's more likely to be influenced anyway? The billionaire who becomes a politician, or the politician who wants to become a billionaire?

Blind Trust Definition | Investopedia

View attachment 67212205

Let me help you.
 
You don't think this was done because Trump is a liberal, right? The guy rose to power on the backs of solid conservative/Libertarian material like American, ocean515, countryboy, TurtleDude and apdst.

So Trump reached across the aisle? Good for him.
 
What is the big difference in what Trump is doing with his Son in Law than say a president who appoints his wife, who has no medical training, as a top advisor in reforming Health Care?

Kushner is not advising Trump on engineering, or surgery, or road building. He's literally advising Trump on what he thinks is best. Most people have friends and family who "advise" all the time. The concept of an advisor shouldn't be some alien concept.
 
Back
Top Bottom