Offline
Trump Tweet On Nordstrom Dumping Ivanka Line Falls Under Inherent Parental Powers
Another tweet by Donald Trump has caused a ruckus back in Washington (I am in Guam for a speech). Trump took after Nordstrom for dropping the Ivanka brand. While the store cited poor sales, Trump tweeted “My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person — always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible!”
Shares for the store chain dropped in value following the tweet and media began calling to ask for the legality of such criticism by the president. The answer is that it is perfectly legal . . . just ask Harry Truman. While the scope of executive privilege is broad, it is not nearly as broad and plenary as that of inherent parental authority. When it comes to a president and his daughter, history has shown that this is one power exercised by all fathers that is accorded sweeping deference and little judicial review.
If you think the Trump tweet was raw consider Truman’s letter to Washington Post music critic Paul Hume after Hume panned the performance of Margaret Truman. Hume wrote that “Miss Truman cannot sign very well.” Comparing Hume to columnist Westbrook Pegler (who Truman previously called a “rat,” Truman proceeded to say that he wanted to punch Hume in the nose and would likely kick the “frustrated old man” in the groin. Hume was 34 at the time.
Letter from HST
Mr. Hume:I’ve just read your lousy review of Margaret’s concert. I’ve come to the conclusion that you are an “eight ulcer man on four ulcer pay.”It seems to me that you are a frustrated old man who wishes he could have been successful.
When you write such poppy-cock as was in the back section of the paper you work for it shows conclusively that you’re off the beam and at least four of your ulcers are at work.Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you’ll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a supporter below!
Pegler, a gutter snipe, is a gentleman alongside you. I hope you’ll accept that statement as a worse insult than a reflection on your ancestry.
H.S.T.
That makes the Trump tweet look pretty mild in comparison.
Offline
Do you really feel that the Nordstrom story is worth two threads?
Anyway, who gives a rat's arse what Harry Truman did? The guy's been dead for over 60 years.
I don't think that - despite what the article says- anybody here on the exchange was questioning the legality of Trump's Tweet. I question whether it was appropriate.
Do you think that it is appropriate behavior for the President of the United States to criticize a business decision made by a private company because it had a negative effect on his family member?
Is that what Trump should be doing?
Last edited by Goose (2/08/2017 3:11 pm)
Offline
What's the matter Goose? Don't like free speech when it comes from the other side? What Truman doesn't matter but how many times did you say "but what about Bush?" long after he left office?
The hate of Trump is spreading to his family members. Everything I've read about Ivanka says she's very involved with woman's rights, but I guess that only matters if that person is a liberal.
Offline
Tim15856 wrote:
What's the matter Goose? Don't like free speech when it comes from the other side? What Truman doesn't matter but how many times did you say "but what about Bush?" long after he left office?
The hate of Trump is spreading to his family members. Everything I've read about Ivanka says she's very involved with woman's rights, but I guess that only matters if that person is a liberal.
What on earth are you talking about Tim? "Don't like free speech"??
Huh?
I did not question the author's right to speak. I did not question common's right to post those words here. I said that I really didn't much care that Harry Truman wrote a nasty letter to a reporter who said that his daughter could not sing, nearly a decade before I was born.
Disagreeing with something someone states is not disdaining free speech, it is the essence of free speech.
Man, I just don't know where you come up with this stuff.
And, I haven't said anything hateful of Ivanka. Whether she is involved in women's issues is immaterial here. The relevant issue is that the President should not be publicly involved in criticizing a business for a business decision just to help out a family member.
You can toss the word liberal into this if you like. It's not relevant, and says much more of your petty hatreds than it does the topic.
Last edited by Goose (2/09/2017 8:29 am)
Offline
We might want think about how far back in history we'd like to go to make a point, but that's up to you guys. America has evolved several times over the last 80 or more years ........... society changes, culture changes, needs change, technology changes, etc. I suppose we could dig up something Millard Fillmore did or said, or maybe James Polk, but we need to evaluate what was said or done in light of the USA within which we live today. Granted there are constants which we need to recognize that are characteristic of a democratic nation, but let's not get our knickers knotted over goofy stuff that doesn't matter today and instead strive to become a better people and nation.
Just my opinion. Carry on.
Last edited by Just Fred (2/09/2017 9:00 am)
Offline
You know people, the Trumpster family members can do what they bloody well please but the fake president should butt out of their business matters and tend to presidential matters. I know that has been a stretch these first few weeks in office but could he please try.
Offline
Now another federal employee is using her time, and our money to push a private brand.
Kellyanne Conway: 'Go buy Ivanka's stuff'
Kellyanne Conway used her platform Thursday to urge Americans to “go buy Ivanka’s stuff,” potentially violating ethics rules of the executive branch.
Standing in the White House press briefing room, Conway, a counselor to the president, encouraged Americans to purchase Ivanka Trump’s products, one day after President Donald Trump himself lashed out at the department store Nordstrom for dropping his daughter’s clothing line.
Offline
If I were Ivanka, I'm not so sure I'd want Kellyanne Conway pushing my stuff, but this isn't a normal administration that's for sure.
Offline
flowergirl wrote:
You know people, the Trumpster family members can do what they bloody well please but the fake president should butt out of their business matters and tend to presidential matters. I know that has been a stretch these first few weeks in office but could he please try.
Do you blame him when his daughter is under attack? Since you guys are outraged over every single thing he does as president, I'd think you'd be grateful if he spent more time on family matters.
Offline
Tim15856 wrote:
flowergirl wrote:
You know people, the Trumpster family members can do what they bloody well please but the fake president should butt out of their business matters and tend to presidential matters. I know that has been a stretch these first few weeks in office but could he please try.
Do you blame him when his daughter is under attack? Since you guys are outraged over every single thing he does as president, I'd think you'd be grateful if he spent more time on family matters.
Tim, Trump's daughter is not under attack.
Nordstrom decided, because of declining a sales to stop carrying her line.
The President chose to go onto attack
No, I'm not "grateful" that the President is obsessed with his daughter's line when he's in a national security briefing.
I'm not "grateful" when he's attacking a private business.
I'm not "grateful" when he, Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway are trying to push his daughter's interests when they should be conducting the nation's business.
Last edited by Goose (2/09/2017 12:25 pm)