Received: from nobody by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cR18k-0003mN-Tw for lojban-newreal@lojban.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:27:23 -0800 Received: from [75.127.10.41] (port=39469 helo=meltingthemsews.com) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cR18i-0003la-Kx for lojban@lojban.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:27:22 -0800 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:25:18 -0700 To: Message-ID: Subject: Gwen: Im horrified by what Blake Shelton did on the Red Carpet: It was awful 5496764 Mime-Version: 1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii From: Golden Globe Live X-Spam-Score: 2.9 (++) X-Spam_score: 2.9 X-Spam_score_int: 29 X-Spam_bar: ++ X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Interesting things that happened to them Home Tickets [...] Content analysis details: (2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: meltingthemsews.com] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST BODY: HTML font color similar or identical to background 0.7 MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 1.9 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 0.9 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS 0.0 T_REMOTE_IMAGE Message contains an external image Interesting things that happened to them

Home

Tickets

Photos

Video Clips

Episodes

-The Golden Globes-
Gwen attackes Blake Shelton

Blake & Gewen loses it
In the biggest story of the evening, Hollywoods hottest couple stepped out on the red carpet and Blake's behavior was horrible. She had to leave him.

Ellen got Gwen to come in and tell her entire story
 
Everyone is talking about this now > >
President-elect Donald Trump intends to name his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as a senior adviser to his White House — a move that would put to the test a 1967 anti-nepotism law and provide a Trump White House already rife with ethical questions a bona fide legal showdown.

In fact, this amounts to Trump's "first attempt to ignore the law," according to Washington University government ethics expert Kathleen Clark. And she says it has huge implications not just for Kushner, but for the rest of his presidency.

I spoke with Clark about anti-nepotism laws, why they exist, and how Kushner and Trump might get around this particular one. Our conversation is below, lightly edited for clarity and brevity.

WAPO: I think a casual observer may wonder why Trump’s son-in-law serving in his administration is a big deal. Why do such anti-nepotism laws exist, and why is nepotism a problem?

CLARK: We have anti-nepotism laws in the federal government and in lots of state governments, because the practice of hiring relatives undermines public confidence that the government official is actually finding best person for the job. What are the chances that the best person for the job just happens to be a relative, right? In addition to the problem of public confidence, hiring a relative also causes problems within the government organization. It can undermine the morale of government officials. It can cause confusion about what the lines of authority are; in other words, the relative may have a particular title, but many may perceive the relative’s role as even more important than the title would suggest. It may be very difficult to say no to the president’s son-in-law. It may be very difficult to say, ‘That’s a bad idea’ to the president’s son-in-law, in a way it would be easier to say those things to someone whom the president hired but isn’t related to — someone who’s not the father of his grandchild or grandchildren.

WAPO: The anti-nepotism law on the books is supposedly a reaction to the Kennedys. But was there an era in politics in which nepotism was a particularly bad problem?

CLARK: What I can tell you is that the federal statute is by no means unique. Almost all states have anti-nepotism laws. A review of state anti-nepotism laws in 2000 found only seven states lacked such laws. So it’s widely perceived as a problem that needs to be addressed by prohibiting the hiring of relatives.

WAPO: The Trump team and Kushner believe a 1993 D.C. Circuit Court decision gives them a way to make this happen, but you’ve noted that the section in question is “dicta.� Can you explain that?

CLARK: The crux of that decision was that the presidential spouse is a de facto officer or employee for purposes of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. And then, after [Judge Laurence] Silberman said that, he added dicta where he said, "We doubt Congress intended to include the White House under the anti-nepotism statute." Judge [James L.] Buckley on the D.C. Circuit concurred in the judgment, but refused to concur in the opinion, and specifically called out that passage and objected to it. So that part of the opinion, on which I suspect the Trump advisers will be relying, is absolutely dicta, and it’s, as I said, rejected by Judge Buckley.
If you wish to be removed from these updates please tell us now
||Jacob Nieland | 1225 Descanso St San Luis Obispo Ca 93405-4801||

No longer receive messages regarding this matter when you inform us
||1626 Timoney Rd, Draper UT 84020||