At least somebody's following the law

 

Last week, the White House bragged that a video of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem blaming the ongoing government shutdown on Democrats is “currently playing at every public airport in America.”

But according to local reports, airports across the country—from Washington state to New York—have announced their refusal to subject travelers to the propaganda.

[...]

“The Port of Seattle will not play the video on its screens at SEA Airport, due to the political nature of the content,” a Sea–Tac spokesperson told local outlets.

Also in Washington, Spokane International Airport is refusing to play the video, due to the airport’s “First Amendment Policy,” which prohibits the display of political advertising content on airport-owned monitors in public spaces.

Oregon’s Portland International Airport won’t show it either, on the grounds that the video could violate the Hatch Act, which bars government employees from certain partisan political activities.

[...]

In New York, the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority, which oversees the Buffalo Niagara International Airport and the Niagara Falls International Airport, has declined as well, citing a “long-standing policy” against “partisan messaging.”

Ditto Westchester County Airport in New York.

  New Republic

I bet they're playing it in Florida and Texas airports.

 

Irony is alive and well

 

Another perfectly Trumpian assignment

 

Trump’s nominee to head the OSC is stalled in the Senate. A White House official told NBC News that Paul Ingrassia, a former podcast host with a history of incendiary commentary, is meeting with senators in one-on-one meetings over the next month before a confirmation vote takes place.

[...]

President Donald Trump and other prominent Republicans have alleged that [Smith's] investigations into then-candidate Trump amounted to illegal political activity.

  NBC News

Obviously it wasn't illegal.

On Wednesday, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., requested that the OSC investigate Smith for “unprecedented interference in the 2024 election.”

[...]

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel, an independent federal agency, confirmed to NBC News on Saturday that it's investigating Smith for alleged violations of the Hatch Act, a law that prohibits certain political activities by government officials. Trump and his allies have not presented specific evidence of wrongdoing.

Well, what a fucking surprise.

The independent agency lacks the authority to bring criminal charges and prosecute individuals who violate the Hatch Act, but it may seek disciplinary action for a federal government employee, such as removal from the civil workforce, or refer its findings of Hatch Act violations to the DOJ for investigation.

If they're looking for violations of the Hatch Act, they could be kept busy night and day in Trump's administration.

Disgusting.

The rule of law presupposes that there are, well, rules. These rules are supposed to provide a consistent, repeatable, and, most important, knowable set of outcomes. Predictability is the key feature of a functioning rules-based system, because people have to know the rules—and the consequences of breaking them—before they act. The difference between living under the rule or law and living by the whims of a madman is that the rights, responsibilities, prohibitions, and privileges of your situation do not change radically every time a person in power throws a hissy fit.

But the Supreme Court has decided that rules and laws do not apply to Trump, and they don’t protect anybody from Trump. That means that the rule of law is functionally dead in this country.

  The Nation

UPDATE 08/03/2025:

 And another!

For the love of Pete.  We are in absurd world.

SDNY.  What has been known for decades as "the Sovereign District of New York."  The country's premier DOJ agency.  There goes that reputation.*

UPDATE 08/08/2025:

New DC US Attorney and former Fox host Jeanine Pirro was back on Fox complaining that nobody wants to work for her. Laura Ingraham: “I’ve been hearing that there is a big problem with staffing—what’s going on? Pirro: I’m down 90 prosecutors. If you want a job in the largest US Attorney’s office, contact me.”

  Meidas Touch

*CORRECTION:  She's not at SDNY, she's at DC. 

UPDATE 10/15/2025:


UPDATE 10/20/2025:

WH Hatch Act interpretation

The Trump administration moved on Friday to weaken federal prohibitions on government employees showing support for President Trump while at work, embracing the notion that they should be allowed to wear campaign paraphernalia and removing an independent review board’s role in policing violations.

[...]

Visible support for candidates and their campaigns in the future is still banned, but support for the current officeholder is not.

  NYT

When will he implode?

Which is exactly what the statement his campaign released earlier said.

I don't think the Supreme Court will actually even agree to hear the cases.  They're being swatted down one after the other in the lower courts.  It would be too much of a risk on Roberts' reputation, and with Trump and his lawyers saying out loud that they put Amy Coney Barrett on the bench just so he could get a win....nah.  I don't think they'll even hear the case.

I think we all know the answer to that.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:

UPDATE:

All the major networks cut away from Trump's disgraceful speech at times.  They should have played this clip at the end of it:

Let me repeat: because they get away with it

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Jesus, the sleaze

First the naturalized citizens who didn't know they were going to be part of the Republican National Convention.  Now this:

[Lynne Patton, a longtime Trump associate who oversees federal housing programs in New York,] told a leader of a tenants’ group at the New York City Housing Authority, the nation’s largest, that she was interested in speaking with residents about conditions in the authority’s buildings, which have long been in poor repair.

Four tenants soon assembled in front of a video camera and were interviewed for more than four hours by Ms. Patton herself. They were never told that their interviews would be edited into a two-minute video clip that would air on Thursday night at the Republican National Convention and be used to bash Mayor Bill de Blasio, three of the tenants said in interviews on Friday.

[...]

Throughout the convention, Mr. Trump has shattered the traditional boundaries between government and politics, and the video was aired on a night when the campaign took over the South Lawn of the White House.

[...]

Three of the four tenants in the public housing video were interviewed on Friday by The New York Times. All three said they opposed President Trump and were misled about the purpose of the video.

[...]

Ms. Patton said that she had spoken with all four tenants on Friday and that they were upset with the way The Times was “twisting their words.”

[...]

In a separate interview, Ms. Quiñones said she talked to Ms. Patton on Friday afternoon and was comfortable with how she was being portrayed by The Times. She said she was disappointed that her words had been twisted to make it seem as if she were a Trump supporter.

Ms. Perez and a third tenant, Manny Martinez, said they had not spoken with Ms. Patton on Friday and did not know what she was talking about.

[...]

Ms. Patton is a Trump family loyalist who before the president’s election organized tournaments on his golf courses and planned his son Eric’s wedding. She had little experience in housing policy before her appointment to HUD.

[...]

The public housing clip was the second instance of the Trump campaign’s misleading participants in an event involving the federal government that was filmed for the Republican National Convention. On Tuesday, the convention showed a video of five new American citizens being sworn in at a naturalization ceremony by Mr. Trump. Some of the five said they did not know that they were being filmed for a political event.

  NYT

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

When you're Trump, they let you do it

But, he has Article II of the Constitution, which says he can do whatever he wants, right?

What happens to the president and his administration if they engage in this kind of activity? There are some notable exceptions to the Hatch Act. Unless involving criminal activity, the president and vice president are technically exempt from these restrictions. The only instance in which the Hatch Act applies directly to the president – thanks to a 1993 amendment to the Act – is if they use their position to intimidate, threaten, or coerce a federal employee.

However, this doesn’t make the talk on Twitter irrelevant. “He may not be violating the Hatch Act, but he is ordering other people to,” Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer, told the Washington Post. “At a certain point you are using White House resources, and that is a violation of the Hatch Act.”

[...]

The Office of Special Counsel, a special body set up just for the Hatch Act, investigates and determines whether a violation has occurred. [..The decision of whether to punish a person found violating the Act falls on the boss..]

  Refinery 29

Well, shit. It's a wonder anyone is ever punished.

A prime example is White House adviser Kellyanne Conway. She has violated the Hatch Act numerous times but avoids consequences despite the Office of Special Counsel advising that she be removed from her position.

In the case of using the White House South Lawn, it could be considered a misuse of congressionally appropriated funds for political gain which would be criminally enforceable. While the Hatch Act violations would fall on Republican National Convention planners and Trump administration employees rather than Trump, misuse of funds could reach Trump.

Not with a Republican-controlled Senate.

The statute of limitations for misusing funds would not have run out in 2021, but Biden made it clear he wouldn't involve himself in Justice Department decisions.

Then I want to see New York AG Letitia James become AG in Biden's administration. Let HER at Trump.

Speaking of Jared

Senior White House adviser Jared Kushner is the subject of a new Hatch Act complaint that says he advocated for President Trump's 2020 reelection while acting in his official government capacity.

In a Sunday interview with CNN host Fareed Zakaria, Kushner, President Trump's son-in-law, weighed in at length about how the Senate's impeachment trial has benefited the president politically, earning a complaint from the ethical watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

  The Hill

Christ, they all do it. How many times has Kellyanne Conway been called out? Three?

Last year, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel found White House counselor Kellyanne Conway in violation of the law by "disparaging Democratic presidential candidates while speaking in an official capacity during television interviews and on social media."

A subpoena was issued from the House Ethics Committee but was ignored by Conway last year.

If there's never any price to pay for it, don't expect them to stop.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Nancy Pelosi, get off your ass!

And if Nancy won't give her blessing to begin impeachment proceedings, the rest of the others must go around her.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:  Al Green is preapred to go around Nancy.



UPDATE:

Flagrant

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

She won't comply

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

The best people

The OSC cited six staffers with violating the federal law in response to a complaint filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) in August.

The act bars federal employees from using their offices and resources for political purposes.

The office concluded that deputy press secretary Raj Shah, President Trump’s executive assistant Madeleine Westerhout, Vice President Pence’s press secretary Alyssa Farah, White House Deputy Director of Communications Jessica Ditto and two others violated the Hatch Act.

The six officials found in violation of the Hatch Act had tweeted Trump’s campaign slogan “Make America Great Again,” or “MAGA” for short, on their official Twitter accounts.

The OSC clarified in March that any reference to the slogan was a clear violation.

Those found to have violated it can be fined as much as $1,000 and face disciplinary actions such as suspension or termination.

  The Hill

Yes, but they won't be.

The OSC decided not to pursue disciplinary action against any of the officials since they deleted their posts once they became aware of the violation.

“They all have been advised that if in the future they engage in prohibited political activity while employed in a position covered by the Hatch Act, we will consider such activity to be a willful and knowing violation of the law, which could result in further action,” the OSC wrote in the ruling.

Kellyanne Conway and Sarah Sanders have violated the rule several times, and CREW has filed multiple complaints. This administration makes its own rules, and nobody holds them to account. Hopefully that will change in January.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Hatch Act is toothless

A number of Trump administration officials, including White House counselor Kellyanne Conway and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, have been cited by the OSC in the past for violations of the law, but no punishments have been levied by the White House.

Authority to punish Hatch Act violations falls to the president. The OSC does not have the power to take action other than informing the White House of violations.

  The Hill

Well, that's absolutely absurd. Why is the law even on the books?  It's as useless as Orrin Hatch himself.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Kellyanne made some enemies

Of course, the whole damned Trump administration is set up to fight each other tooth and nail in order to entertain the emperor.

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway violated the Hatch Act on two occasions, the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) informed the Trump administration Tuesday.

Appearing in her official capacity, Conway endorsed and advocated against political candidates, the watchdog said, referring its findings to President Trump "for appropriate disciplinary action."

  The Hill

And what, I wonder, will that be?

Hatch Act violations committed by White House staff are typically handled directly by the president. Consequences for violating the law range from an official reprimand to a civil penalty of up to $1,000. Other penalties include suspension, termination or even debarment from federal employment for up to five years.

[...]

The White House rejected the report’s findings, saying “Conway did not advocate for or against the election of any particular candidate” in a statement provided to reporters.

Never mind disciplinary action. They just reject the charge.

“In fact, Kellyanne’s statements actually show her intention and desire to comply with the Hatch Act — as she twice declined to respond to the host’s specific invitation to encourage Alabamans to vote for the Republican,” deputy press secretary Hogan Gildley said.

Ahead of December's special election to replace Attorney General Jeff Sessions in the Senate, Conway made remarks critical of then-candidate Doug Jones in his race against former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore.

During her initial Fox appearance, Conway blasted Jones as "weak on crime" and "weak on borders," before declining to specifically endorse Moore when asked.

[...]

“So, vote Roy Moore?” host Brian Kilmeade interjected.

“I’m telling you that we want the votes in the Senate to get this tax bill through,” Conway responded.

So, it's okay if you don't say the specific words.

“While the Hatch Act allows federal employees to express their views about candidates and political issues as private citizens, it restricts employees from using their official government positions for partisan political purposes, including by trying to influence partisan elections,” OSC says in its report.

“Ms. Conway’s statements during the 'Fox & Friends' and 'New Day' interviews impermissibly mixed official government business with political views about candidates in the Alabama special election for U.S. Senate."

She also touted Ivanka's clothing line on TV, but I don't see where anything was done about that.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

About time

This isn't the first time the White House has violated the Hatch Act, but as far as I know, it's the first time they've been sued for it.

A prominent government ethics expert has filed a complaint against White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, alleging that she violated federal law Monday by appearing to oppose Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore's Democratic opponent.

Walter Shaub, who resigned in July as the head of the Office of Government Ethics, said on Twitter on Wednesday that he lodged a complaint claiming that the top aide to President Donald Trump ran afoul of the Hatch Act when she discouraged Alabamans from voting for the Democratic nominee, Doug Jones.

[...]

However, the Hatch Act — which limits political involvement by federal employees — does not apply to elected officials such as the president or vice president.

  Politico

Maybe it needs an amendment.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

On What Planet?

Old Lard Ass doesn't personally manage this Twitter account, but rather minion Dan Scavino. Still, OLA is responsible for it, and once in a while retweets from it to the one he does on his own.

What gangs and cartels are flooding our country?  And which of our cities have been turned into "warzones"?

I've been seeing lots of stories of law-abiding family men being deported lately, but I have yet to see one where a criminal alien was even harassed, much less deported.

Scavino gets tough with more than just gangs and cartels.

Even the picture chosen to place on the account is tough, eh?

Here's the avatar on OLA's personal Twitter account.

Not so tough.  Slightly prissy.  Still frowny.  Or is that squinty?  Does he need glasses?

Speaking of Minion Scavino, he seems to have made it past an earlier allegation of violating the Hatch Act. At least for now.

The alleged violation centers around a tweet that Trump senior adviser Dan Scavino made Saturday when he labeled Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) a “liability” and called on him to be primaried in next year’s congressional elections.

Scavino was lashing out at Amash for being a member of the House Freedom Caucus, the conservative wing of the House that the Trump administration has been bashing after their recent failure to pass health care reform. But according to Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who served as the chief ethics lawyer for the Bush White House from 2005 to 2007, Scavino violated federal law with the tweet.

[...]

Painter was referencing the fact that Scavino’s personal Twitter account features an avatar of him in the Oval Office — essentially a representation of him as a government official.

[...]

The Hatch Act is a law passed under former President Franklin Roosevelt that prevents all federal government employees — with exceptions to the president, vice president and certain other high-ranking political offices — from using their positions in the government to influence or sway elections.

[...]

“This is use of official position to influence an election. Look at the photo and description underneath.

[...]

“Ethics 101- You can’t put official titles and WH photos all over your “personal” Twitter page and use it for partisan politics. Hatch Act,” he added.

  The Blaze

Apparently you can. It's a brave new world.