quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

On same weekend as record-breaking arms deal, Saudis announced $100 million donation to Ivanka fund

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2017/5/21/1664578/-On-same-weekend-as-record-breaking-arms-deal-Saudis-announced-100-million-donation-to-Ivanka-fund?_=2017-05-21T06%3A47%3A07.354-07%3A00

Ivanka Trump’s new fund raises all sorts of ethical questions

If true, this is egregious and potentially illegal, according to multiple ethics and legal experts. “If the donation would be a quid pro quo bribe, then asking for it is certainly solicitation of a bribe, which is every bit as criminal as the bribe itself,” Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe tells me via email. “But I started that sentence with ‘if’ because I don’t have enough facts about the donation request to opine on the ultimate bribe issue.” Nevertheless, he says:

At the very least, though, a donation is a “present,” which – if made by a foreign government or an agent of such a government or an entity controlled by it – is expressly banned by the text of the Foreign Emoluments Clause with respect to anyone holding “any Office of Profit or Trust” under the United States. Whether it counts as an “emolument” becomes irrelevant if it’s a “present,” which any donation would at least be.

Tribe explains, “Even if the First Daughter and Assistant to the President somehow manages to create formal distance between herself and that version of the Clinton Foundation, which of course her father denounced endlessly during the campaign, the hypocrisy of the move is jaw-dropping.” He adds, “Such contributions would surely constitute a financial benefit to … her brand, and her family’s brand even if she is unable to spend a penny of the contributions themselves. As such, soliciting such contributions violates at least the spirit of the Foreign Emoluments Clause.”

Even more explicitly, the Office of Government Ethics rules, former Republican ethics counsel Richard Painter tells me, “prohibit use of official position to solicit for ANY charity or other private entity.” The OGE guidelines specifically state: “Executive branch employees are subject to restrictions on the gifts that they may accept from sources outside the Government. Unless an exception applies, executive branch employees may not accept gifts that are given because of their official positions or that come from certain interested sources.” The rationale for this is obvious (except to Trump). “Even if a gift is from a person or organization that has no official dealings with the employee’s agency, accepting a gift offered because of the employee’s official position may create an appearance of using public office for private gain,” the OGE guidelines explain. “Moreover, if an employee receives a payment from an outside source in some circumstances, the public may believe that the employee is serving two masters or is distracted by outside activities.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/04/26/ivanka-trumps-new-fund-raises-all-sorts-of-ethical-questions/?utm_term=.4e76aeb9d880

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Well that's an interesting spin.

You get more zany each day.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Sure. Here's the reality:

On same weekend as record-breaking arms deal, Saudis announced $100 million donation to Ivanka fund

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2017/5/21/1664578/-On-same-weekend-as-record-breaking-arms-deal-Saudis-announced-100-million-donation-to-Ivanka-fund?_=2017-05-21T06%3A47%3A07.354-07%3A00

Ivanka Trump’s new fund raises all sorts of ethical questions

If true, this is egregious and potentially illegal, according to multiple ethics and legal experts. “If the donation would be a quid pro quo bribe, then asking for it is certainly solicitation of a bribe, which is every bit as criminal as the bribe itself,” Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe tells me via email. “But I started that sentence with ‘if’ because I don’t have enough facts about the donation request to opine on the ultimate bribe issue.” Nevertheless, he says:

At the very least, though, a donation is a “present,” which – if made by a foreign government or an agent of such a government or an entity controlled by it – is expressly banned by the text of the Foreign Emoluments Clause with respect to anyone holding “any Office of Profit or Trust” under the United States. Whether it counts as an “emolument” becomes irrelevant if it’s a “present,” which any donation would at least be.

Tribe explains, “Even if the First Daughter and Assistant to the President somehow manages to create formal distance between herself and that version of the Clinton Foundation, which of course her father denounced endlessly during the campaign, the hypocrisy of the move is jaw-dropping.” He adds, “Such contributions would surely constitute a financial benefit to … her brand, and her family’s brand even if she is unable to spend a penny of the contributions themselves. As such, soliciting such contributions violates at least the spirit of the Foreign Emoluments Clause.”

Even more explicitly, the Office of Government Ethics rules, former Republican ethics counsel Richard Painter tells me, “prohibit use of official position to solicit for ANY charity or other private entity.” The OGE guidelines specifically state: “Executive branch employees are subject to restrictions on the gifts that they may accept from sources outside the Government. Unless an exception applies, executive branch employees may not accept gifts that are given because of their official positions or that come from certain interested sources.” The rationale for this is obvious (except to Trump). “Even if a gift is from a person or organization that has no official dealings with the employee’s agency, accepting a gift offered because of the employee’s official position may create an appearance of using public office for private gain,” the OGE guidelines explain. “Moreover, if an employee receives a payment from an outside source in some circumstances, the public may believe that the employee is serving two masters or is distracted by outside activities.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/04/26/ivanka-trumps-new-fund-raises-all-sorts-of-ethical-questions/?utm_term=.4e76aeb9d880

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
Part of your being like a lost little child is the way you lack the maturity to admit when you made a mistake and instead lash out at your school master

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
It's not Ivanka's personal fund, it is a woman's fund that she likes - ran by the World Bank

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Actually, they were all over the Clinton Foundation donations. So, no.