• 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!

Is this conflict of interest?

Is this conflict of interest?


  • Total voters
    22
  • Poll closed .
For those who do see this as a conflict of interest, I presume that the government, including the President himself, should be barred from staying at, or doing business with, Trump resorts, correct?
 
I'm not real crazy about her or anyone in their position doing this, I think it's cheap. If someone likes her outfit they will look up her clothing line and find it, people know she's going to self promote, but doing so discreetly is important IMO. If the Obama's did it I'd have been all over them.
 
I would prefer to see her not wearing anything at all. problem solved... :)
 
If anybody knows or cares what brand name she is wearing maybe has other problems.

How could this be a problem when there are real things to discuss?
 
So, it's your opinion that she should not wear any clothing of any type from her own line, at any time, day or night, until after she is no longer affiliated with the government, correct? Just making sure, because it seems that's exactly what you're saying.

She should not be modeling her line publicly while she is a senior official in the administration, who, as a condition of that appointment, put her business in a trust and demanded that she not be involved in its marketing. So I guess that you understand exactly what I am saying.

If her line was designing golf clubs and she was continually photographed, (or self posting photographs) using the golf clubs would that make a difference to you?
 
And I do remember the Ann Romney thing. It was over the cost, implying she was out-of-touch with the commoners, not that she was somehow profiting from it. And that was dumb, too.

My point was that many people notice clothing and why it's being worn, or wear it came from and how much it costs. And yes coming on the heels of Romney's unfortunate remarks about the commoners, it did make her seem very out of touch.
 
She should not be modeling her line publicly while she is a senior official in the administration, who, as a condition of that appointment, put her business in a trust and demanded that she not be involved in its marketing. So I guess that you understand exactly what I am saying.

If her line was designing golf clubs and she was continually photographed, (or self posting photographs) using the golf clubs would that make a difference to you?

A simple 'yes' or 'correct' would have been quicker.
 
A simple 'yes' or 'correct' would have been quicker.

Since I had already stated this position twice before, I thought you might need a complete recap. Sorry if that was not the case.

What say you about the golf clubs? Why can you not see that posting pictures of herself using her product is marketing her product?
 
How is this exactly a conflict of interest?
 
As a WH official, who is ostensibly on duty 24/7, should she refrain from wearing her own brand 24/7, or only during official and planned business activities? Would she be allowed to wear her own brand when out with the family on vacation and there's a paparazzi nearby shooting photos?

When she accepted Daddy's offer to be a White House official, Ivanka promised in January to disengage from her clothing/shoes/accessories business.

Like all Trump promises, it was a vague statement which she quickly broke by promoting a gold bracelet (from her jewelry line) that she prominently flashed during an interview on CBS's 60 Minutes.
 
When she accepted Daddy's offer to be a White House official, Ivanka promised in January to disengage from her clothing/shoes/accessories business.

Like all Trump promises, it was a vague statement which she quickly broke by promoting a gold bracelet (from her jewelry line) that she prominently flashed during an interview on CBS's 60 Minutes.

By flashed, do you mean wore?

How did anybody know that bracelet was from her jewelry line?
 
Should any random Congressperson refrain from wearing any clothing made by a company in which they hold stock?
 
Should any random Congressperson refrain from wearing any clothing made by a company in which they hold stock?

Ivanka is the owner, not a stockholder. As a newly minted WH official, Ivanka promised to disengage her fashion brand from politics in January.

She is still publicly promoting her design lines, albeit in more subtle ways. Daddy still promotes his Mar-a-Lago, Trump National Golf Club (Bedminster, New Jersey), Trump Tower NYC businesses etc.

Ivanka herself castigated Kellyanne Conway in February for crass TV promotion of her brand.....

Ivanka Trump 'rebuked Kellyanne Conway for promoting her fashion brand on live TV'
 
Ivanka is the owner, not a stockholder. As a newly minted WH official, Ivanka promised to disengage her fashion brand from politics in January.

She is still publicly promoting her design lines, albeit in more subtle ways. Daddy still promotes his Mar-a-Lago, Trump National Golf Club (Bedminster, New Jersey), Trump Tower NYC businesses etc.

Ivanka herself castigated Kellyanne Conway in February for crass TV promotion of her brand.....

Ivanka Trump 'rebuked Kellyanne Conway for promoting her fashion brand on live TV'

What is the difference between an owner and a stockholder?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Should any random Congressperson refrain from wearing any clothing made by a company in which they hold stock?

If its their company, and they have put it in trust specifying that they would not market same....YES.

Splitting hairs here. Ivanka is not a random stockholder in her company. Very bad leap.
 
What is the difference between an owner and a stockholder?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How would the public know that Congressman X is a stockholder? How would the company profit? Ivanka owns the company...it is freaking named Ivanka Trump.
 
Ivanka is the owner, not a stockholder. As a newly minted WH official, Ivanka promised to disengage her fashion brand from politics in January.

She is still publicly promoting her design lines, albeit in more subtle ways. Daddy still promotes his Mar-a-Lago, Trump National Golf Club (Bedminster, New Jersey), Trump Tower NYC businesses etc.

Ivanka herself castigated Kellyanne Conway in February for crass TV promotion of her brand.....

Ivanka Trump 'rebuked Kellyanne Conway for promoting her fashion brand on live TV'

Stockholders are owners.
 
How would the public know that Congressman X is a stockholder? How would the company profit? Ivanka owns the company...it is freaking named Ivanka Trump.

Are you attempting to answer my question or am I subject to a Tourette’s poster?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ivanka Trump wholly owns her various business ventures. There are no stockholders or partners.

Ivanka Trump's Empire

Irrelevant minute for this thread. Either way an owner is an owner is an owner and every owner, whether sole or part of a group, has a vested interest in their company making money because they get personal financial gain from it.
 
Using public office to market/enrich yourself can be viewed as unethical.

It takes people who are bad and unethical, to show us where the holes in our system area.
Put another way, rules and laws only exist because of bad actors and people who cannot make a reasonably ethical choice on their own without help.

Given that she's not *really* elected to office, and she owned the clothing line presumably before this and wore it then, I would pass this one on ethics. I mean, if it was a tacky th-shirt that said "by my product", I might say that's too obvious. But whatever the case, it's nauseating that we have to even think of this stuff...what a class act Trump and his crew is. MAGA indeed. He's for the little people though!! Too funny.

I think Trump and Mar-a-Lago looks 100x worse, given he's an elected official and there is more than just marketing, there are huge payments, etc.
 
Irrelevant minute for this thread. Either way an owner is an owner is an owner and every owner, whether sole or part of a group, has a vested interest in their company making money because they get personal financial gain from it.

In January Ivanka said she would not have anything to do with her company/products when she accepted the official WH appointment.

Obviously, she lied. It's not grievous, but it is indeed a conflict of interest (see above) since she knows perfectly well the paparazzi and media will capture her image whenever possible.

This is free and constant publicity for her various personal branded products. Trump does much the same with his branded products/properties.
 
In January Ivanka said she would not have anything to do with her company/products when she accepted the official WH appointment.

Obviously, she lied. It's not grievous, but it is indeed a conflict of interest (see above) since she knows perfectly well the paparazzi and media will capture her image whenever possible.

This is free and constant publicity for her various personal branded products. Trump does much the same with his branded products/properties.

That, in and of itself, is a fair point. But, the conversation between you and I had gravitated toward any random Senator who is also a clothing company stockholder having (or not) the same conflict of interest.
 
Back
Top Bottom