And so it begins: the dark times

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen Fromm-5
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3110

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Eric Charles-2
Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen Fromm-5
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
Yes I've heard of it. The wife is different from a son-in-law, though. Maybe he depends on him because he fears he is not adequate for the job and knows that his grandiosity is just an illusion. 
http://psychcentral.com/lib/donald-trump-and-the-narcissistic-illusion-of-grandiosity/

Although you never can be sure what goes on in a mind unless the person tells you
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/the-mind-of-donald-trump/480771/

By the way what's interesting is how badly the whole election system failed. Both candidates were disliked. Ironically the most disliked candidate by the population at large and also the candidate most disliked within his own party won the election.

-J.



-------- Original message --------
From: Eric Charles <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/21/17 17:23 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] And so it begins: the dark times

Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Gillian Densmore

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
Yes I've heard of it. The wife is different from a son-in-law, though. Maybe he depends on him because he fears he is not adequate for the job and knows that his grandiosity is just an illusion. 

Although you never can be sure what goes on in a mind unless the person tells you

By the way what's interesting is how badly the whole election system failed. Both candidates were disliked. Ironically the most disliked candidate by the population at large and also the candidate most disliked within his own party won the election.

-J.



-------- Original message --------
From: Eric Charles <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/21/17 17:23 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] And so it begins: the dark times

Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Steve Smith
In reply to this post by Eric Charles-2

Jochen, et al -

I have to say I accept or agree with the idea of a sitting President (or any high official) having close access to their most trusted advisors, whether they are family or friends.  It is only natural IMO and in principle will allow them to do a better job.  I understand the anti-nepotism rules to avoid there being any "profiting" which is moot among the uber-wealthy such as Trump and Kushner.   I understand restricting cabinet and other "conserved" positions such as the one Bobby Kennedy held from 60-6-4 as Attorney General.  We deserve a broader base of perspective than that of a "dynasty"...

All that said, Kushner (or Ivanka or ???) in the White House is disturbing for the conflict of interest reasons.  If Trump pretends he (and he alone, because HE is so mighty and great) could run both Trump Inc. and Trump USA at the same time, he is admitting to an intended conflict of interest (or complete unawareness of the basic meaning of the term?).   If he claims handing his day-to-day in Trump Inc off to Ivanka and Kushner and ???  waives the conflict of interest, he is mistaken, and by installing Kushner IN the White-House makes that conflict explicit again.  Nothing I would not expect from him.  


- Steve


On 1/21/17 9:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Steve Smith
In reply to this post by Eric Charles-2

Jochen, et al -

I have to say I accept or agree with the idea of a sitting President (or any high official) having close access to their most trusted advisors, whether they are family or friends.  It is only natural IMO and in principle will allow them to do a better job.  I understand the anti-nepotism rules to avoid there being any "profiting" which is moot among the uber-wealthy such as Trump and Kushner.   I understand restricting cabinet and other "conserved" positions such as the one Bobby Kennedy held from 60-6-4 as Attorney General.  We deserve a broader base of perspective than that of a "dynasty"...

All that said, Kushner (or Ivanka or ???) in the White House is disturbing for the conflict of interest reasons.  If Trump pretends he (and he alone, because HE is so mighty and great) could run both Trump Inc. and Trump USA at the same time, he is admitting to an intended conflict of interest (or complete unawareness of the basic meaning of the term?).   If he claims handing his day-to-day in Trump Inc off to Ivanka and Kushner and ???  waives the conflict of interest, he is mistaken, and by installing Kushner IN the White-House makes that conflict explicit again.  Nothing I would not expect from him.  


- Steve


On 1/21/17 9:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen Fromm-5
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
I have watched the large demonstrations of the women's march today on CNN, it is pretty impressive. Finally some protests, why did it take so long? It looks like there is still some hope.

It feels a bit like an American Civil War, not between south and north, between Confederate and United States, but between angry white males represented by Donald Trump and peaceful women represented by Hillary Clinton.

In Europe we had at least two traumatic periods of war: the 30 years war from 1618-1648 between catholic and protestant states, and the 30 years from the beginning of WW I in 1914/15 until the end of WW II 1945 between various forms of *-isms (fascism in Italy and nazism in Germany vs communism in Russia and capitalism in the rest of the world). Every time Germany was in ruins afterwards.

If America should slide into authoritarianism like Turkey and all the *-stan countries such as Turkmenistan or Kazakhstan it will not end well. 

-J


-------- Original message --------
From: Steven A Smith <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/21/17 21:53 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen, et al -

I have to say I accept or agree with the idea of a sitting President (or any high official) having close access to their most trusted advisors, whether they are family or friends.  It is only natural IMO and in principle will allow them to do a better job.  I understand the anti-nepotism rules to avoid there being any "profiting" which is moot among the uber-wealthy such as Trump and Kushner.   I understand restricting cabinet and other "conserved" positions such as the one Bobby Kennedy held from 60-6-4 as Attorney General.  We deserve a broader base of perspective than that of a "dynasty"...

All that said, Kushner (or Ivanka or ???) in the White House is disturbing for the conflict of interest reasons.  If Trump pretends he (and he alone, because HE is so mighty and great) could run both Trump Inc. and Trump USA at the same time, he is admitting to an intended conflict of interest (or complete unawareness of the basic meaning of the term?).   If he claims handing his day-to-day in Trump Inc off to Ivanka and Kushner and ???  waives the conflict of interest, he is mistaken, and by installing Kushner IN the White-House makes that conflict explicit again.  Nothing I would not expect from him.  


- Steve


On 1/21/17 9:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Pamela McCorduck
Make no mistake, Jochen, there were many men marching in the crowds. 

The angry white men are generally older, high school graduates or less, though not necessarily in poverty, who see the world around them changing, and imagine that Trump can turn back the clock: coal mines will reopen, old-time factories, too, and they needn’t even think about watching their mouths around women or minorities.

But also, plenty of women voted for Trump. The New York Times interviewed some of them. Their answers were appalling: “You’ve got to look behind the words and find what’s in his heart.” Or, “I’m looking for the good in him.” As if he were a juvenile delinquent eligible for foster care, not a candidate for president. 

We talked in this group about Type 1 thinking (slow, analytical) and Type 2 (impulsive, spontaneous). Voters for Trump have admired him because “he says what he thinks,” whereas Clinton was measured and thoughtful, which these people took to be “phony.”

It’s certainly a civil war between the Type 1 and the Type 2 thinkers.

 
On Jan 21, 2017, at 2:52 PM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

I have watched the large demonstrations of the women's march today on CNN, it is pretty impressive. Finally some protests, why did it take so long? It looks like there is still some hope.

It feels a bit like an American Civil War, not between south and north, between Confederate and United States, but between angry white males represented by Donald Trump and peaceful women represented by Hillary Clinton.

In Europe we had at least two traumatic periods of war: the 30 years war from 1618-1648 between catholic and protestant states, and the 30 years from the beginning of WW I in 1914/15 until the end of WW II 1945 between various forms of *-isms (fascism in Italy and nazism in Germany vs communism in Russia and capitalism in the rest of the world). Every time Germany was in ruins afterwards.

If America should slide into authoritarianism like Turkey and all the *-stan countries such as Turkmenistan or Kazakhstan it will not end well. 

-J


-------- Original message --------
From: Steven A Smith <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/21/17 21:53 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen, et al -

I have to say I accept or agree with the idea of a sitting President (or any high official) having close access to their most trusted advisors, whether they are family or friends.  It is only natural IMO and in principle will allow them to do a better job.  I understand the anti-nepotism rules to avoid there being any "profiting" which is moot among the uber-wealthy such as Trump and Kushner.   I understand restricting cabinet and other "conserved" positions such as the one Bobby Kennedy held from 60-6-4 as Attorney General.  We deserve a broader base of perspective than that of a "dynasty"...

All that said, Kushner (or Ivanka or ???) in the White House is disturbing for the conflict of interest reasons.  If Trump pretends he (and he alone, because HE is so mighty and great) could run both Trump Inc. and Trump USA at the same time, he is admitting to an intended conflict of interest (or complete unawareness of the basic meaning of the term?).   If he claims handing his day-to-day in Trump Inc off to Ivanka and Kushner and ???  waives the conflict of interest, he is mistaken, and by installing Kushner IN the White-House makes that conflict explicit again.  Nothing I would not expect from him.  


- Steve


On 1/21/17 9:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen Fromm-5
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
On CNN I saw mainly women. There was also an interview with senator Cory Brooker from New Jersey who promised to fight against any attempts "to grab" the constitution.

What you say about turning back the clock is exactly what worries me. Napoleon, Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler and Mao, they all tried to turn back the clock and hoped to make their country great again. In the end they produced millions of dead people.

As we all know know coal mines will not reopen, nor will old-fashioned factories magically become productive again. We have the same problems in Europe, and the coal industry is dying here too. The manufacturing jobs went to China and India long ago. We couldn't afford to buy the things if they were produced here. 

I fear the only way out of this crisis is forward, together, not backwards. And it is encouraging to see so many people protesting peacefully. I hope this was not the last protest march. But will Donald listen? Doubtful. 

-J.


-------- Original message --------
From: Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/22/17 01:22 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] And so it begins: the dark times

Make no mistake, Jochen, there were many men marching in the crowds. 

The angry white men are generally older, high school graduates or less, though not necessarily in poverty, who see the world around them changing, and imagine that Trump can turn back the clock: coal mines will reopen, old-time factories, too, and they needn’t even think about watching their mouths around women or minorities.

But also, plenty of women voted for Trump. The New York Times interviewed some of them. Their answers were appalling: “You’ve got to look behind the words and find what’s in his heart.” Or, “I’m looking for the good in him.” As if he were a juvenile delinquent eligible for foster care, not a candidate for president. 

We talked in this group about Type 1 thinking (slow, analytical) and Type 2 (impulsive, spontaneous). Voters for Trump have admired him because “he says what he thinks,” whereas Clinton was measured and thoughtful, which these people took to be “phony.”

It’s certainly a civil war between the Type 1 and the Type 2 thinkers.

 
On Jan 21, 2017, at 2:52 PM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

I have watched the large demonstrations of the women's march today on CNN, it is pretty impressive. Finally some protests, why did it take so long? It looks like there is still some hope.

It feels a bit like an American Civil War, not between south and north, between Confederate and United States, but between angry white males represented by Donald Trump and peaceful women represented by Hillary Clinton.

In Europe we had at least two traumatic periods of war: the 30 years war from 1618-1648 between catholic and protestant states, and the 30 years from the beginning of WW I in 1914/15 until the end of WW II 1945 between various forms of *-isms (fascism in Italy and nazism in Germany vs communism in Russia and capitalism in the rest of the world). Every time Germany was in ruins afterwards.

If America should slide into authoritarianism like Turkey and all the *-stan countries such as Turkmenistan or Kazakhstan it will not end well. 

-J


-------- Original message --------
From: Steven A Smith <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/21/17 21:53 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen, et al -

I have to say I accept or agree with the idea of a sitting President (or any high official) having close access to their most trusted advisors, whether they are family or friends.  It is only natural IMO and in principle will allow them to do a better job.  I understand the anti-nepotism rules to avoid there being any "profiting" which is moot among the uber-wealthy such as Trump and Kushner.   I understand restricting cabinet and other "conserved" positions such as the one Bobby Kennedy held from 60-6-4 as Attorney General.  We deserve a broader base of perspective than that of a "dynasty"...

All that said, Kushner (or Ivanka or ???) in the White House is disturbing for the conflict of interest reasons.  If Trump pretends he (and he alone, because HE is so mighty and great) could run both Trump Inc. and Trump USA at the same time, he is admitting to an intended conflict of interest (or complete unawareness of the basic meaning of the term?).   If he claims handing his day-to-day in Trump Inc off to Ivanka and Kushner and ???  waives the conflict of interest, he is mistaken, and by installing Kushner IN the White-House makes that conflict explicit again.  Nothing I would not expect from him.  


- Steve


On 1/21/17 9:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Bob Ballance
In reply to this post by Pamela McCorduck
Yes, many women and men, all ages and races. I was there in DC.

...Bob

On Jan 21, 2017, at 19:22, Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email]> wrote:

Make no mistake, Jochen, there were many men marching in the crowds. 

The angry white men are generally older, high school graduates or less, though not necessarily in poverty, who see the world around them changing, and imagine that Trump can turn back the clock: coal mines will reopen, old-time factories, too, and they needn’t even think about watching their mouths around women or minorities.

But also, plenty of women voted for Trump. The New York Times interviewed some of them. Their answers were appalling: “You’ve got to look behind the words and find what’s in his heart.” Or, “I’m looking for the good in him.” As if he were a juvenile delinquent eligible for foster care, not a candidate for president. 

We talked in this group about Type 1 thinking (slow, analytical) and Type 2 (impulsive, spontaneous). Voters for Trump have admired him because “he says what he thinks,” whereas Clinton was measured and thoughtful, which these people took to be “phony.”

It’s certainly a civil war between the Type 1 and the Type 2 thinkers.

 
On Jan 21, 2017, at 2:52 PM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

I have watched the large demonstrations of the women's march today on CNN, it is pretty impressive. Finally some protests, why did it take so long? It looks like there is still some hope.

It feels a bit like an American Civil War, not between south and north, between Confederate and United States, but between angry white males represented by Donald Trump and peaceful women represented by Hillary Clinton.

In Europe we had at least two traumatic periods of war: the 30 years war from 1618-1648 between catholic and protestant states, and the 30 years from the beginning of WW I in 1914/15 until the end of WW II 1945 between various forms of *-isms (fascism in Italy and nazism in Germany vs communism in Russia and capitalism in the rest of the world). Every time Germany was in ruins afterwards.

If America should slide into authoritarianism like Turkey and all the *-stan countries such as Turkmenistan or Kazakhstan it will not end well. 

-J


-------- Original message --------
From: Steven A Smith <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/21/17 21:53 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] And so it begins: the dark times

Jochen, et al -

I have to say I accept or agree with the idea of a sitting President (or any high official) having close access to their most trusted advisors, whether they are family or friends.  It is only natural IMO and in principle will allow them to do a better job.  I understand the anti-nepotism rules to avoid there being any "profiting" which is moot among the uber-wealthy such as Trump and Kushner.   I understand restricting cabinet and other "conserved" positions such as the one Bobby Kennedy held from 60-6-4 as Attorney General.  We deserve a broader base of perspective than that of a "dynasty"...

All that said, Kushner (or Ivanka or ???) in the White House is disturbing for the conflict of interest reasons.  If Trump pretends he (and he alone, because HE is so mighty and great) could run both Trump Inc. and Trump USA at the same time, he is admitting to an intended conflict of interest (or complete unawareness of the basic meaning of the term?).   If he claims handing his day-to-day in Trump Inc off to Ivanka and Kushner and ???  waives the conflict of interest, he is mistaken, and by installing Kushner IN the White-House makes that conflict explicit again.  Nothing I would not expect from him.  


- Steve


On 1/21/17 9:23 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Actually Jochen, this one is squarely on the Clintons. When Bill appointed Hillary to a White House task force back in the early 1990s, this went through the court system. The judges in that case ruled that the law applied to Cabinet appointments and paid positions within the larger government, but not to White House staff. Kushner will similarly be in a unpaid position.

“We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision, “So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.”




-----------
Eric P. Charles, Ph.D.
Supervisory Survey Statistician
U.S. Marine Corps

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
First it was not clear what *-ism mix it will be - authoritarianism, nepotism, cronyism, nationalism or a mixture of it. Sarah Kendzior and Paul Krugman predict we will end up in an authoritarian dictatorship. What do you think, which *-ism will it be?

Maybe you could say the new minority president teaches nationalism, practices nepotism and cronyism and leads inevitably to authoritarianism. Will he be allowed to break the law? Isn't hiring of Jared Kushner already illegal?

The law clearly says: "A public official may not appoint, employ, promote [..] in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

-J.



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Marcus G. Daniels
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5

Jochen wrote:

 

On CNN I saw mainly women.”

 

Even in the sleepy little town of Santa Fe, the streets were packed with demonstrators.  Of course, women of many ethnicities -- some of them were infirm and shouldn’t have been out in the wind and snow.   Lots of men, young adults, and children too.   Police were courteous and helpful.   Civilization is still holding on in the City Different. 

 

Marcus  

 


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Russ Abbott
Same in LA. Lots of both women and men.

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 3:14 PM Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

Jochen wrote:

 

On CNN I saw mainly women.”

 

Even in the sleepy little town of Santa Fe, the streets were packed with demonstrators.  Of course, women of many ethnicities -- some of them were infirm and shouldn’t have been out in the wind and snow.   Lots of men, young adults, and children too.   Police were courteous and helpful.   Civilization is still holding on in the City Different. 

 

Marcus  

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: And so it begins: the dark times

Steve Smith

I have enough "Trumpian" friends to know that without exception they have tried to frame this response as an attempt to undermine "the peaceful transition of power".  

I throw two things squarely in their face:

  1. Donald said he would accept the outcome of the election ONLY if he won.  This isn't about Hillary's loss, it is about Donalds win.
  2. If he had lost, the demonstrators in the street would be gun-toting "open-carry" types and his biker gang "wall of meat" instead of (mostly) peaceful women (and men and children).

Their response is usually just blustery bluff... "woofa woofa".  


On 1/21/17 6:41 PM, Russ Abbott wrote:
Same in LA. Lots of both women and men.

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 3:14 PM Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

Jochen wrote:

 

On CNN I saw mainly women.”

 

Even in the sleepy little town of Santa Fe, the streets were packed with demonstrators.  Of course, women of many ethnicities -- some of them were infirm and shouldn’t have been out in the wind and snow.   Lots of men, young adults, and children too.   Police were courteous and helpful.   Civilization is still holding on in the City Different. 

 

Marcus  

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove