Trump's son-in-law to be named White House Advisor

by **GRR Spartan** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 14:59

That would be the same Jared Kushner who owns more than a dozen major real estate ventures along in and around NYC and NJ. The one who was meeting with the CEO of the Chinese insurance conglomerate days after the election.

But we need to just go one with our lives while a White House employee lines up multimillion dollar finance deals.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-kushner-idUSKBN14T251

http://nypost.com/2017/01/08/kushner-eyed-deal-with-chinese-magnate-days-after-election/

by **The_Dude** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 15:01

You voted for Hilary
Trump's son-in-law to be named White House Advisor 1966794946

by **Watch Out Pylon!** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 15:01

Drain that swamp!

by **Watch Out Pylon!** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 15:01

The_Dude wrote:You voted for Hilary

The majority of Americans did.

by **Robert J Sakimano** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 15:03

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
The_Dude wrote:You voted for Hilary

The majority of Americans did.

no they didn't.. Trump won in a landslide.

by **The_Dude** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 15:13

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
The_Dude wrote:You voted for Hilary

The majority of Americans did.

You know what that and a cup of coffee will get you?

by **Robert J Sakimano** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 15:44

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:Drain that swamp!

you thought he was serious when he said words?

by **xsanguine** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 16:03

I was saying it before the election... Republicans should hope Trump loses. Whether he's the next Abraham Lincoln or not, he's going to fail. All these people that voted for him hoping this would change the cultural marxist trends are going to be sorely disappointed. It doesn't appear like it yet, but the left will learn from this and adjust accordingly to become more palatable to the people that have been in their crosshairs the past 10 years.

by **The_Dude** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 16:04

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:Drain that swamp!
you thought he was serious when he said words?

You voted for HiLiary. Lol

by **The_Dude** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 16:05

xsanguine wrote:I was saying it before the election... Republicans should hope Trump loses. Whether he's the next Abraham Lincoln or not, he's going to fail. All these people that voted for him hoping this would change the cultural marxist trends are going to be sorely disappointed. It doesn't appear like it yet, but the left will learn from this and adjust accordingly to become more palatable to the people that have been in their crosshairs the past 10 years.

The left is doubling down on their failures. You'd think this is s wake up call to then but nope lol

by **xsanguine** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 16:07

The_Dude wrote:
xsanguine wrote:I was saying it before the election... Republicans should hope Trump loses. Whether he's the next Abraham Lincoln or not, he's going to fail. All these people that voted for him hoping this would change the cultural marxist trends are going to be sorely disappointed. It doesn't appear like it yet, but the left will learn from this and adjust accordingly to become more palatable to the people that have been in their crosshairs the past 10 years.

The left is doubling down on their failures. You'd think this is s wake up call to then but nope lol

They will right now. They just lost and they're scared. They're going to make gains, though. That is for certain.

by **The_Dude** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 16:27

xsanguine wrote:
The_Dude wrote:

The left is doubling down on their failures. You'd think this is s wake up call to then but nope lol

They will right now. They just lost and they're scared. They're going to make gains, though. That is for certain.

Well sure. They are at historic lows.

But retaining Pelosi and keeping the same people in leadership that sunk the party suggests otherwise. The public is tired of democrats finger pointing and attacking while offering no real solutions.

The Democrats need a complete re birth as a party and it will probably get worse before it gets better for them.

What's their message right now to the American people? More name calling the other side?

by Guest Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 16:49

GRR Spartan wrote:That would be the same Jared Kushner who owns more than a dozen major real estate ventures along in and around NYC and NJ. The one who was meeting with the CEO of the Chinese insurance conglomerate days after the election.

But we need to just go one with our lives while a White House employee lines up multimillion dollar finance deals.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-kushner-idUSKBN14T251

http://nypost.com/2017/01/08/kushner-eyed-deal-with-chinese-magnate-days-after-election/

And you forgot - HE'S A JEW!!!

Now the jooose will be in control of the world....wait.....I thought Trump was an anti-Semite?

by Guest Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 16:51

The_Dude wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

They will right now. They just lost and they're scared. They're going to make gains, though. That is for certain.

Well sure. They are at historic lows.

But retaining Pelosi and keeping the same people in leadership that sunk the party suggests otherwise. The public is tired of democrats finger pointing and attacking while offering no real solutions.

The Democrats need a complete re birth as a party and it will probably get worse before it gets better for them.

What's their message right now to the American people? More name calling the other side?

And Obama isn't leaving DC like other past Ex Presidents. Plans to keep his hand in - that ought to help things out. Is reactivating OFA, IF I'm a RNC member I'm celebrating that the man that oversaw the decimation of the D party from the local level up refuses to leave.

by **steveschneider** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 17:13

xsanguine wrote:
The_Dude wrote:

The left is doubling down on their failures. You'd think this is s wake up call to then but nope lol

They will right now. They just lost and they're scared. They're going to make gains, though. That is for certain.

I agree, and I think a lot of the voters that protested or sat out are going to take the election more seriously next time.

Also, demographics favor the dems for the future. In four more years there's just going to be more eligible voters that are millennials who have voted dem so far.

by Guest Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 17:42

Divesting himself of his business roles and working for free.....yep, he's a real crook. You people need to get some fucking perspective. IF a Dem EVER offered to work for free the Press would be making them into Gandhi.

Kushner, like his father-in-law, is a real estate developer who is taking steps to separate himself from his company. His lawyer gave a statement to NBC News:

“Mr. Kushner is committed to complying with federal ethics laws and we have been consulting with the Office of Government Ethics regarding the steps he would take,” Kushner’s lawyer said in a statement.

Kushner will resign from his company, divest “substantial assets,” and recuse himself from matters that would impact his financial interests, Gorelick said.

However the bigger problem with appointing Kushner may be an anti-nepotism law put in place in 1967. That law specifically mentions son-in-laws; however, there is disagreement over whether the law would prevent an appointment within the White House itself. From an earlier NBC story:

This law would prevent Trump from giving Kushner a job in a Cabinet department. But would it apply to a job as a White House adviser? Probably not, though that is not crystal clear.

In 1993, a federal appeals court looked at the issue as part of a lawsuit over Hillary Clinton’s role in the health care task force. The court didn’t decide the question but strongly suggested that the White House staff is not a federal agency.

It appears that in order to steer clear of the anti-nepotism rule, Kushner’s job will be a non-paid position. This was confirmed by the transition team Monday afternoon:

Trump’s son-in-law to be named senior adviser

And of course the "Gorelick" referenced as helping him divest is a long time Clinton supporter/adviser.

by Guest Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 17:43

steveschneider wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

They will right now. They just lost and they're scared. They're going to make gains, though. That is for certain.

I agree, and I think a lot of the voters that protested or sat out are going to take the election more seriously next time.

Also, demographics favor the dems for the future. In four more years there's just going to be more eligible voters that are millennials who have voted dem so far.

Yes, the "Blue Wall" and the inevitable demographic wins.....LMAO....Dems have been pushing that tripe for 20 years. How's it working so far?

by **xsanguine** Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 19:27

LooseGoose wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

I agree, and I think a lot of the voters that protested or sat out are going to take the election more seriously next time.

Also, demographics favor the dems for the future. In four more years there's just going to be more eligible voters that are millennials who have voted dem so far.

Yes, the "Blue Wall" and the inevitable demographic wins.....LMAO....Dems have been pushing that tripe for 20 years. How's it working so far?

There's a lot of truth to that, too. Many kids who had liberal ideals in their early 20's change to a more libertarian or even conservative outlook. That's always been the case. The Republicans do have to get their shit together, though. This kind of thing with Trump will only work for so long. If the left gets their act together and cuts out the elitism and narcissism, they'll dominate as everyone anticipated they would.

by Guest Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 19:41

xsanguine wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Yes, the "Blue Wall" and the inevitable demographic wins.....LMAO....Dems have been pushing that tripe for 20 years. How's it working so far?

There's a lot of truth to that, too. Many kids who had liberal ideals in their early 20's change to a more libertarian or even conservative outlook. That's always been the case. The Republicans do have to get their shit together, though. This kind of thing with Trump will only work for so long. If the left gets their act together and cuts out the elitism and narcissism, they'll dominate as everyone anticipated they would.

And then 10 years later the Rs will. There have been books written on this subject. The pendulum always swings back.

by Guest Mon 9 Jan 2017 - 23:19

by **Cameron** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 2:22

Awesome.

by **xsanguine** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 10:29

Nm, antineo... I misunderstood what you were trying to say. Carry on.

by Guest Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 10:43

Antineoplastons wrote:How many people here know that the reason Christie got dumped from Trump's team is because he prosecuted Kushner's father and had him sent away for financial fraud? I doubt it's many.

Kind of strange that the mainstream media that hates everything Trump and Christie ( they sure did make a big deal about him supposedly closing down a traffic lane LOL) wouldn't report this, huh?

LOL, not many? IT was only covered by every major news organization out there.

Trump's son-in-law to be named White House Advisor GzYVDoW

by TheReal_LWS Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 10:55

The unhinged left is strong in this thread.

by **Rocinante** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 11:00

So Trump is beholden to Russia through his financial ties, and Kushner is beholden to China. Good the see the Republicans now completely cool with the countries they used to clutch their pearls over. Hell, we may be headed to a one world government under president trump. [thumbsup]

by TheReal_LWS Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 11:08

Rocinante wrote:So Trump is beholden to Russia through his financial ties, and Kushner is beholden to China. Good the see the Republicans now completely cool with the countries they used to clutch their pearls over. Hell, we may be headed to a one world government under president trump. [thumbsup]

Roci =

Trump's son-in-law to be named White House Advisor 4198636888

by **Rocinante** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 11:14

I actually want a one world socialist government, A. Like Star Trek.

by Guest Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 11:40

Antineoplastons wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

LOL, not many? IT was only covered by every major news organization out there.

So honestly, you knew about this?

Google search pulling up salon and gawker stories doesn't mean it was covered on cable TV or the nightly news in the same fashion every other negative story about Trump was covered.

Yep, I've known about it since the summer time.....can't pin a date on it but long before the election.

by Guest Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 11:41

Rocinante wrote:So Trump is beholden to Russia through his financial ties, and Kushner is beholden to China. Good the see the Republicans now completely cool with the countries they used to clutch their pearls over. Hell, we may be headed to a one world government under president trump. [thumbsup]

Actually none of that is true except in the minds of Dems that are still unhinged by the fact that they actually lost to Trump.

by **GRR Spartan** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 12:29

Have to hand i to the Trumps.

They are changing the meaning of Blind Trust.

Trump will turn things over to his son and Kurshner's solution is to turn over his real estate business to his mother and brother.

by **GRR Spartan** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 12:39

LooseGoose wrote:
Rocinante wrote:So Trump is beholden to Russia through his financial ties, and Kushner is beholden to China. Good the see the Republicans now completely cool with the countries they used to clutch their pearls over. Hell, we may be headed to a one world government under president trump. [thumbsup]

Actually none of that is true except in the minds of Dems that are still unhinged by the fact that they actually lost to Trump.

I didn't enlist and give this country 4 years active / 2 years reserve of my life to have some rich fuckers sell us out to the highest bidders located in foreign countries. Trump is under the thumb of Russian Oligarchs and Putin. His son-in-law is schmoozing Chinese financiers knowing his father-in-law was just elected POTUS and Goose sees nothing wrong

11,000 more voters chose Trump. We get to live with it but take your "Can't we all get along" shit and shove it. I hope the Democrats treat Trump the same way the GOP and "conservatives" treated Obama.

by TheReal_LWS Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 12:42

GRR Spartan wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Actually none of that is true except in the minds of Dems that are still unhinged by the fact that they actually lost to Trump.

I didn't enlist and give this country 4 years active / 2 years reserve of my life to have some rich fuckers sell us out to the highest bidders located in foreign countries.

11,000 more voters chose Trump. We get to live with it but take your "C"an't we all get along shit and shove it. I hope the Democrats treat Trump the same way the GOP and "conservatives" treated Obama.

Maybe Goose thinks privatizing the VA is a big joke or a smart thing to do. As a Vet its a slap in the face from a chickenshit who took a Purple Heart from a supporter who earned won and Trump said, "I always wanted one of these".
Now Trump wants to make hos billionaire buddies rich by handing them the VA.

Can GRR go one thread without giving his military resume? LOL unhinged

by **GRR Spartan** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 12:50

I am passionate about a few things.

Selling out to Russia and the Chinese while refusing to release tax records, financial data along with twisting the meaning of blind trusts is alarming. Planning on privatizing the VA and Medicare so a selected few get vast financial gain is a problem.

We have "conservatives" here who think like pre WW2 Italians who loved Mussolini because the trains ran on time.

by **steveschneider** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 13:19

LooseGoose wrote:Divesting himself of his business roles and working for free.....yep, he's a real crook. You people need to get some fucking perspective. IF a Dem EVER offered to work for free the Press would be making them into Gandhi.

Kushner, like his father-in-law, is a real estate developer who is taking steps to separate himself from his company. His lawyer gave a statement to NBC News:

“Mr. Kushner is committed to complying with federal ethics laws and we have been consulting with the Office of Government Ethics regarding the steps he would take,” Kushner’s lawyer said in a statement.

Kushner will resign from his company, divest “substantial assets,” and recuse himself from matters that would impact his financial interests, Gorelick said.

However the bigger problem with appointing Kushner may be an anti-nepotism law put in place in 1967. That law specifically mentions son-in-laws; however, there is disagreement over whether the law would prevent an appointment within the White House itself. From an earlier NBC story:

This law would prevent Trump from giving Kushner a job in a Cabinet department. But would it apply to a job as a White House adviser? Probably not, though that is not crystal clear.

In 1993, a federal appeals court looked at the issue as part of a lawsuit over Hillary Clinton’s role in the health care task force. The court didn’t decide the question but strongly suggested that the White House staff is not a federal agency.

It appears that in order to steer clear of the anti-nepotism rule, Kushner’s job will be a non-paid position. This was confirmed by the transition team Monday afternoon:

Trump’s son-in-law to be named senior adviser

And of course the "Gorelick" referenced as helping him divest is a long time Clinton supporter/adviser.

Heh, duped by the old he's working for free so he must be ethical schtick.

by Guest Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 13:49

Antineoplastons wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Actually none of that is true except in the minds of Dems that are still unhinged by the fact that they actually lost to Trump.
LooseGoose wrote:

Yep, I've known about it since the summer time.....can't pin a date on it but long before the election.

Well I'm specifically speaking to the reason Christie got snubbed for VP, not just his blacklisting from the entire team which was only reported on AFTER the election results. If you'll notice on your google search results the only media that covered that angle ( revenge for his father ) BEFORE the election was the alternative media ( in this case just Gawker) and not the mainstream media. Any guesses as to why? My guess is because the MSM i.e. the Jewish media didn't want the public to know how much pull some young, politically inexperienced Jew had, i.e. he's the one calling the shots

You're wrong, it was covered extensively by many outlets prior to the election.

by Guest Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 13:50

GRR Spartan wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Actually none of that is true except in the minds of Dems that are still unhinged by the fact that they actually lost to Trump.

I didn't enlist and give this country 4 years active / 2 years reserve of my life to have some rich fuckers sell us out to the highest bidders located in foreign countries. Trump is under the thumb of Russian Oligarchs and Putin. His son-in-law is schmoozing Chinese financiers knowing his father-in-law was just elected POTUS and Goose sees nothing wrong

11,000 more voters chose Trump. We get to live with it but take your "Can't we all get along" shit and shove it. I hope the Democrats treat Trump the same way the GOP and "conservatives" treated Obama.

Link me to a few posts like this when Hills/Bill were selling us out to the highest bidder???

I'll wait.

by **steveschneider** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 15:17

Antineoplastons wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

Heh, duped by the old he's working for free so he must be ethical schtick.

And what was the general reaction when the public learned Trump was willing to allow his son-in-law to dictate the direction of this country based on vengeance?

Based on vengeance? Please elaborate.

by **steveschneider** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 15:50

Antineoplastons wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

Based on vengeance? Please elaborate.

Christie prosecuted Kushner's dad back when he was a US Attorney and he ended up doing time

Huh, I didn't think about that. I thought the Bridge scandal was the reason he dropped off but that looks like that is it.

I guess though Kushner was going to have a roll either way, it's clear him and Ivanka wanted to be involved.

by Guest Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 18:48

Antineoplastons wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

Heh, duped by the old he's working for free so he must be ethical schtick.

And what was the general reaction when the public learned Trump was willing to allow his son-in-law to dictate the direction of this country based on vengeance?

I thought it was marvelous. I would have fixed the bastard given the chance.

Of course I think Christie's a blowhard anyway. So nothing was lost "for the country".

by **Cameron** Tue 10 Jan 2017 - 19:51

Antineoplastons wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

I thought it was marvelous. I would have fixed the bastard given the chance.

Of course I think Christie's a blowhard anyway. So nothing was lost "for the country".

I never said anything was lost "For the country". It revealed a truth to people paying attention ( which is why the media didn't make a big deal out of it like they did when he said the word pussy 10 years ago). That Jared Kushner is about to be the most powerful person in the world, at least its figurehead since we will never get close to knowing the identity of those truly pulling the strings ( Some cabal of Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Freemasons and Jesuits....all Satanists and primarily Khazar Zionists without a doubt)

All you have to do is look at history and apply logic. I'm gonna educate you on something you nor anybody on this board has knowledge of. George HW Bush signed into law the declaration that the US was founded on the 7 Laws of Noah, which is nothing more than a veil for the Noahide Laws of the Talmud ( look into the Talmud since I would imagine you don't know what that is either...not saying I would expect you to know this so I'm not trying to sound self-righteous as I only learned myself recentnly). It's called Public Law 102-14. Look up these laws and understand the punishment for them is decapitation. Now ask yourself, why is the boogeyman Sharia Law constantly being discussed as such a dangerous threat to the US yet nobody is discussing the Noahide Laws that actually have some form of US gov't sanctity. It's because the same people who want these laws for the US that are currently in use in Israel are the same people creating this boogeymen. I.E. The Mossad backed with the help of the CIA. Didn't GHWB also head up the CIA before becoming POTUS??

http://www.thegoldencalfspeaks.com/noahide-law/noahide-law-timeline-unfolding-of-jewish-one-world-government/

I looked up Public Law 102-14. https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-congress/house-joint-resolution/104/text

Not seeing where it says the punishment for them is decapitation. Also not seeing what punishment could have to do with it. Near as I can tell, it's a mostly hollow law that established the date of Education Day in the USA. What action could merit punishment under this law?

Lest this post maintain too civil a tone, let me just state for the record that I think you are an occasionally entertaining moron with truly ridiculous ideas about pretty much everything you choose to comment upon, and I do not have high expectations of a coherent response to this post.

by Sponsored content