Posted on 08/07/2020 10:10:35 AM PDT by lowbridge
Thursday on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) weighed in on the possibility of President Donald Trump giving his speech accepting the Republican Party presidential nomination from the White House, despite some suggesting it could a violation of the Hatch Act.
-snip
“I think it’s an outrage,” Gillibrand lamented. “President Trump continues to demean his office. He continues to break norms, and if anyone helps him do his speech, it’s in violation of the Hatch Act. So he may well be exempt, but again, to misuse federal resources for political gain is something that we do not tolerate and is illegal in many respects. So I hope he does not choose to again cross that line and continue to undermine the office of the presidency by doing things that are inappropriate and unethical.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
These people are sick.
Besides the President and VP being specifically exempt under the Hatch Act, there are Less Restricted Employees that have certain exemptions that allow them to participate in Campaign Events etc and that list includes many executive branch.
As usual, the criminal journalists don’t do their job verifying Democrat drivel.
The hatch act needs to be amended to prevent gov employees from interjecting their personal political views into the performance of their duties. That would have resulted in a lot of firings from the swamp in the last 3 years.
Skank blew Bill Clinton and is lecturing us.
And she isn’t correct. A president is not forbidden from a political activity at the White House. There are some financial things to take care of.
By this logic he cannot fly Air Force one to a Campaign event and have Secret Service protection. He pays for such activities, but there are clearly allowed.
“She is sort of right.“
She is totally wrong.
The Hatch Act was passed to prevent New Deal politicians from using WPA funded laborers for direct political campaign activities.
It was passed in direct response to gross abuse of the WPA (Works Progress Administration) which was a New Deal make-work program. The program was designed to help unemployed unskilled laborers by hiring them for federal infrastructure projects.
Democrat incumbents instead had these workers doing GOTV re-election campaigning on the taxpayer dime. Conservatives were rightly outraged and passed the Hatch act.
Those who opposed the Hatch act argued that incumbents SHOULD be able to use their administrative staff and resources to mount a vigorous reelection campaign, including strategic planning, speechwriting, etc.. and that certain political activities were impossible to separate from non-political executive functions of the office.
For example, when a President directs his staff to focus on passage of a major promised tax cut - he believes it is for the good of the country, but it also helps him politically. How can you separate the two?
This is a legitimate point, so the Hatch act exempted certain activities, so that a President and VP could pursue their political agendas while on office, (as they were elected to do) without having to worry about being in violation of the Hatch Act.
There is nothing wrong with a President using his staff to carry out his political agenda, write speeches, develop strategies, etc.. - the hatch act might prevent him from using IRS agents or US postal service workers to campaign door to door for his re-election. Or it might prevent him from ordering national guard to wear Trump hats.
The tax funded WPA workers were supposed to be used on roads and bridges - they were being used to go door to door campaigning for Democrats’ re-election - THAT was what the Hatch act was passed to prevent - it was NOT passed to keep a President from using his staff to advance his political agenda.
What if he goes into the basement and gives it?
Yes that’s why he’s the President.
I guess nobody helped Obama with his speech(es) for second term.
Do it from Mar a Lago.
Or from his New Jersey golf club.
Yes...I was wondering what happened to her. She’s been very quiet since dropping from the race.
In a room with the Lincoln Memorial in the background.
Sturgis??
Trump just plays them like a fiddle!
I had to look it up. :-) Yeah something like that. Outside the box thinking.
“to misuse federal resources for political gain is something that we do not tolerate and is illegal in many respects.”
Except when they do it.
only when they believe it can injure their enemy.
Ms. Gillibrand has lost her marbles....
WH Staff cannot help on campaign. The law is very clear.
Sorry Kristin, the Biden Veepstakes is about over and you did not win...
You now confirm for us that you are truly just a pretty face!
It is the nature of the speech (a campaign speech) not who wrote it.
And the President lives in the building. Campaign staff may not be permitted to have offices in the building but as Joe Biden would explain, “C’mon, man!”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.