peagia13
Full Member
Posts: 166
Sept 2, 2016 19:52:32 GMT
|
Post by peagia13 on Nov 20, 2016 20:21:34 GMT
Their business.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Nov 20, 2016 20:25:43 GMT
There have been unmarried presidents in the past (not recent past, more like 19th century) whose daughters or maybe sisters undertook First Lady duties and served as White House hostess, etc.
I would not have any problem with Ivanka taking on these duties if she's more suited and willing than Melania. But Ivanka can't be both First Lady substitute and CEO substitute. They've gotta choose. (And the Wall Street Journal says Trump needs to divest himself of every single business asset, anyway. Like that's going to happen.)
And I wouldn't have a problem with there being no effective First Lady, say, if Melania chose to stay away completely and no one else stepped in. I don't really care if they maintain two separate households ... even doubled security costs are pretty minimal when you look at our overall federal budget.
My problem would be the disruption to Trump Tower/Fifth Avenue/Central Park area/NYC in general. If she lived in a country house somewhere and security was simpler, I would have zero problem with it. But they can't do to New York City what it sounds as though they're going to do. They just can't.
But I suppose if they want to, they will anyway. And Ivanka will continue meeting with foreign leaders while she runs the business. And diplomats will continue staying at Trump hotels in order to curry favor with the president.
Is it too soon to start hiding my head under the pillow?!?
|
|
|
Post by gypsymama on Nov 20, 2016 20:25:50 GMT
How in the hell is it their business when we are paying? ?
|
|
|
Post by mlynn on Nov 20, 2016 20:29:10 GMT
It will not cost any extra. I read an article post-election that stated their personal residence in NY would have 24/7 security from SS whether he was there or not. These things will all be done even if Melania and Barron move to the White House on day one.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Nov 20, 2016 20:31:12 GMT
It will not cost any extra. I read an article post-election that stated their personal residence in NY would have 24/7 security from SS whether he was there or not. These things will all be done even if Melania and Barron move to the White House on day one. There will not be anywhere near the level of security or disruption to the area if they're not actually in residence. Any article that assures you otherwise is confused or lying.
|
|
used2scrap
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,034
Jan 29, 2016 3:02:55 GMT
|
Post by used2scrap on Nov 20, 2016 20:32:57 GMT
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,739
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Nov 20, 2016 20:33:12 GMT
It will not cost any extra. I read an article post-election that stated their personal residence in NY would have 24/7 security from SS whether he was there or not. These things will all be done even if Melania and Barron move to the White House on day one. There will not be anywhere near the level of security or disruption to the area if they're not actually in residence. Any article that assures you otherwise is confused or lying. Protecting property vs people- 2 separate ballgames.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Nov 20, 2016 20:35:34 GMT
It will not cost any extra. I read an article post-election that stated their personal residence in NY would have 24/7 security from SS whether he was there or not. These things will all be done even if Melania and Barron move to the White House on day one. If this true, then they have decided to handle New York very differently than they now handle Chicago. Presently, there is always secret service assigned in/near the Obama home, but it is nothing near the precautions/staff assigned when one or more of the family is onsite. And the difference is not just the personal protective detail ("body men"). The perimeter details, the neighborhood security protocol, and the traffic detours are substantially different, as is the outlay of Chicago, county, and state police.
|
|
|
Post by mirabelleswalker on Nov 20, 2016 20:37:11 GMT
It will not cost any extra. I read an article post-election that stated their personal residence in NY would have 24/7 security from SS whether he was there or not. These things will all be done even if Melania and Barron move to the White House on day one. Every time they leave NYC to go to DC or come back it is going to involve shutting down highways, streets, etc. It's going to cost a bloody fortune.
|
|
Rhondito
Pearl Clutcher
MississipPea
Posts: 4,660
Jun 25, 2014 19:33:19 GMT
|
Post by Rhondito on Nov 20, 2016 20:44:00 GMT
Also, I think I read that he has to take a salary. He does have to accept his salary, but he is free to donate it if he wants. A couple of presidents have done that.
|
|
|
Post by lisae on Nov 20, 2016 20:45:09 GMT
I get that being a First Son is very different from being an ordinary kid. However, parents move all the time and move their children mid-year. Trump is going to be Commander and Chief and those in the military have to move and it certainly isn't always an option for one parent to stay behind and only move their kids during the summer. The Obamas considered keeping their children in Chicago at first but in the end, they made the move to Washington as a family.
DH and I discussed this the other day when it was rumored she might stay in NY. He commented on what an education it would be to live in the White House. I hope that they will at least move to Washington over the summer and be there for the next school year. First Lady isn't a defined role. She can do as much or as little as she likes. Staying in NY gets her out of a lot of the traditional duties.
I think Trump has this idea that he can go home on weekends and run the country from NY. Will we be building him a situation room in his penthouse? I think he is in for a real shock at the amount of work and responsibility he is taking on.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 12:47:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 20:45:54 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 12:47:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 20:47:36 GMT
It will not cost any extra. I read an article post-election that stated their personal residence in NY would have 24/7 security from SS whether he was there or not. These things will all be done even if Melania and Barron move to the White House on day one. We're going to need a source for that. ETA: Some FACTS from the articles linked above: From the Fortune Article From the NBC news article:
|
|
oceanchyck
Junior Member
Posts: 56
Jun 29, 2014 16:45:53 GMT
|
Post by oceanchyck on Nov 20, 2016 20:52:13 GMT
According to the article (see last couple sentences)...
NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell later reported that the pair will move to the White House at the end of the school year in mid-2017.
So we're talking less than 6 months? Seems reasonable and I'm not even a Trump fan...
|
|
Mystie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,299
Jun 25, 2014 19:53:37 GMT
|
Post by Mystie on Nov 20, 2016 20:53:12 GMT
There have been unmarried presidents in the past (not recent past, more like 19th century) whose daughters or maybe sisters undertook First Lady duties and served as White House hostess, etc. I would not have any problem with Ivanka taking on these duties if she's more suited and willing than Melania. But Ivanka can't be both First Lady substitute and CEO substitute. They've gotta choose. (And the Wall Street Journal says Trump needs to divest himself of every single business asset, anyway. Like that's going to happen.) And I wouldn't have a problem with there being no effective First Lady, say, if Melania chose to stay away completely and no one else stepped in. I don't really care if they maintain two separate households ... even doubled security costs are pretty minimal when you look at our overall federal budget. My problem would be the disruption to Trump Tower/Fifth Avenue/Central Park area/NYC in general. If she lived in a country house somewhere and security was simpler, I would have zero problem with it. But they can't do to New York City what it sounds as though they're going to do. They just can't.
But I suppose if they want to, they will anyway. And Ivanka will continue meeting with foreign leaders while she runs the business. And diplomats will continue staying at Trump hotels in order to curry favor with the president. Is it too soon to start hiding my head under the pillow?!? This is my problem, too. For him to come back to NYC every weekend, for her and Barron to keep living at Trump Towers...these are massive, massive disruptions to an incredibly crowded and busy city. I just can't see how this can work long term. Not to mention the expense of it. If they had a country house as other presidents have had and they wanted to move back and forth, maybe go to their Palm Beach estate or whatever, I could see it. But NYC is a whole other thing. And I understand wanting to keep Barron in his school. But it seems like both the Trumps think this is going to be some part-time job that they can step away from whenever they feel like it. That's not how this works. If Melania wants to parent Barron and keep him in his school (both good goals) then perhaps she could do it from somewhere a little less in the middle of things than Trump Towers. And if Ivanka wants to take over the FLOTUS duties, then she needs to divest herself of her company interests ASAP. And nobody will do anything about any of this, so what's the point?
|
|
|
Post by mirabelleswalker on Nov 20, 2016 20:54:09 GMT
According to the article (see last couple sentences)... NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell later reported that the pair will move to the White House at the end of the school year in mid-2017. So we're talking less than 6 months? Seems reasonable and I'm not even a Trump fan... The article I read in the NY Post said there were no plans in place but that it was "possible" Melania would move in the future.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 12:47:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 20:54:26 GMT
I could care less and will pick my battles, she can live wherever, but when they start rounding up immigrants or attempting to change our rights as women I'll be screaming holy hell!
|
|
Mystie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,299
Jun 25, 2014 19:53:37 GMT
|
Post by Mystie on Nov 20, 2016 20:55:33 GMT
According to the article (see last couple sentences)... NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell later reported that the pair will move to the White House at the end of the school year in mid-2017. So we're talking less than 6 months? Seems reasonable and I'm not even a Trump fan... Yes, that seems reasonable to me, too. I've also heard that this is a long-term plan. No idea which to believe, maybe they don't know for sure themselves yet.
|
|
Rhondito
Pearl Clutcher
MississipPea
Posts: 4,660
Jun 25, 2014 19:33:19 GMT
|
Post by Rhondito on Nov 20, 2016 20:59:24 GMT
It will not cost any extra. I read an article post-election that stated their personal residence in NY would have 24/7 security from SS whether he was there or not. These things will all be done even if Melania and Barron move to the White House on day one. If this true, then they have decided to handle New York very differently than they now handle Chicago. Presently, there is always secret service assigned in/near the Obama home, but it is nothing near the precautions/staff assigned when one or more of the family is onsite. And the difference is not just the personal protective detail ("body men"). The perimeter details, the neighborhood security protocol, and the traffic detours are substantially different, as is the outlay of Chicago, county, and state police. The Obama home in Chicago is very different from Trump Tower. There aren't other families and businesses in the Obama home, people coming and going all day, every day. Trump Tower is going to have to be secure at all times, otherwise who's to say someone couldn't come in and set up a bomb, or whatever, while the family isn't there and then blow the President away when he returns. I know it's going to be expensive, and it's going to be a pain in the ass, but after all is said and done there are no stipulations in place stating if you live in NYC you can't run for President because of the potential security costs and difficulties. While not ideal, he and his family have the right to the same security as any other President.
|
|
used2scrap
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,034
Jan 29, 2016 3:02:55 GMT
|
Post by used2scrap on Nov 20, 2016 21:01:31 GMT
If this true, then they have decided to handle New York very differently than they now handle Chicago. Presently, there is always secret service assigned in/near the Obama home, but it is nothing near the precautions/staff assigned when one or more of the family is onsite. And the difference is not just the personal protective detail ("body men"). The perimeter details, the neighborhood security protocol, and the traffic detours are substantially different, as is the outlay of Chicago, county, and state police. The Obama home in Chicago is very different from Trump Tower. There aren't other families and businesses in the Obama home, people coming and going all day, every day. Trump Tower is going to have to be secure at all times, otherwise who's to say someone couldn't come in and set up a bomb, or whatever, while the family isn't there and then blow the President away when he returns. I know it's going to be expensive, and it's going to be a pain in the ass, but after all is said and done there are no stipulations in place stating if you live in NYC you can't run for President because of the potential security costs and difficulties. While not ideal, he and his family have the right to the same security as any other President. And all the other presidents and their immediate families in recent history have moved into the White House.
|
|
imsirius
Prolific Pea
Call it as I see it.
Posts: 7,661
Location: Floating in the black veil.
Jul 12, 2014 19:59:28 GMT
|
Post by imsirius on Nov 20, 2016 21:05:09 GMT
Okay... didn't think I'd ever find a soapbox that was in anyway shape or form supporting a Trump so I give that to you. But... HAVE? She doesn't HAVE to do a damn thing! Just because her husband is president - a job, yes albeit a very important job. She has a brain. She has her own things. Her child has his own life. She was not elected. She does not need to have a staff just because she is first lady. I thought it was ridiculous that she gave a platform (like a beauty queen) when it seems fairly obvious she wants nothing to do with this shit show. I give big props to Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden who took on the cause of military families - honestly, Joining Forces was impressive work. But no way did I expect them to do it. Obviously they are both well accomplished on their own so it was a good fit for them. To expect the same from Mrs. Trump is just foolish and unfair to her. She does have rights as a human. She is more than just his wife. Damn those dirty feminist ideals making me defend this! Sorry..should have said "Isn't she supposed to? Not have to. My bad.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 12:47:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 21:05:37 GMT
According to the article (see last couple sentences)... NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell later reported that the pair will move to the White House at the end of the school year in mid-2017. So we're talking less than 6 months? Seems reasonable and I'm not even a Trump fan... Seems reasonable as long as Trump is footing the tens of millions in extra costs, and not expecting the taxpayers to pick up the tab.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 12:47:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 21:12:02 GMT
And nobody will do anything about any of this, so what's the point? If people continue to speak out, the politicians will not be able to ignore this. While not ideal, he and his family have the right to the same security as any other President. Absolutely. And if they are going to insist on way more special arrangements and severe disruptions to NYC, then they can damned well pay for it themselves. Trump and many others have raged and harped for years about the federal deficit, the state of our economy, and Government waste. They don't get to ignore that issue now and demand that the little people pay for something extra and out of the ordinary. Especially if the very early preliminary cost estimates are already in the tens of millions of dollars. If they're paying, it's all good. If they're not, the issue will continue to be a problem.
|
|
happymomma
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,078
Aug 6, 2014 23:57:56 GMT
|
Post by happymomma on Nov 20, 2016 21:15:49 GMT
I think we are going to see a lot of non-traditional things happen with this guy.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Nov 20, 2016 21:20:10 GMT
If this true, then they have decided to handle New York very differently than they now handle Chicago. Presently, there is always secret service assigned in/near the Obama home, but it is nothing near the precautions/staff assigned when one or more of the family is onsite. And the difference is not just the personal protective detail ("body men"). The perimeter details, the neighborhood security protocol, and the traffic detours are substantially different, as is the outlay of Chicago, county, and state police. The Obama home in Chicago is very different from Trump Tower. There aren't other families and businesses in the Obama home, people coming and going all day, every day. Trump Tower is going to have to be secure at all times, otherwise who's to say someone couldn't come in and set up a bomb, or whatever, while the family isn't there and then blow the President away when he returns. I know it's going to be expensive, and it's going to be a pain in the ass, but after all is said and done there are no stipulations in place stating if you live in NYC you can't run for President because of the potential security costs and difficulties. While not ideal, he and his family have the right to the same security as any other President. If it appeared that I was trying to say that the Trump family doesn't have the right to security or that a NYC resident should be prevented from running for president, that was not my intention. I also didn't mean to imply that the Fifth Avenue in NYC and the Kenwood neighborhood in Chicago are identical. This is what I was trying to say: Based in my experience, I was questioning the claim of another poster that security would be the same in the Trump home and neighborhood whether or not the family is onsite. I would be interested in any information you have that explains how/why a NYC residence/neighborhood would require the same level of security with/without family presence.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 12:47:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 21:22:34 GMT
I think we are going to see a lot of non-traditional things happen with this guy. Non-traditional is fine. As long as those things are ethical and legal. However, Trump doesn't get to ignore his personal responsibility for his non-traditional family residence choices. Or any of his other choices for that matter. On this issue, the responsibility for the extra costs are his and not ours.
|
|
Rhondito
Pearl Clutcher
MississipPea
Posts: 4,660
Jun 25, 2014 19:33:19 GMT
|
Post by Rhondito on Nov 20, 2016 21:25:30 GMT
And nobody will do anything about any of this, so what's the point? If people continue to speak out, the politicians will not be able to ignore this. While not ideal, he and his family have the right to the same security as any other President. Absolutely. And if they are going to insist on way more special arrangements and severe disruptions to NYC, then they can damned well pay for it themselves. Trump and many others have raged and harped for years about the federal deficit, the state of our economy, and Government waste. They don't get to ignore that issue now and demand that the little people pay for something extra and out of the ordinary. Especially if the very early preliminary cost estimates are already in the tens of millions of dollars. If they're paying, it's all good. If they're not, the issue will continue to be a problem. Then the Obamas need to pay for all of the overseas trips the First Lady took with Sascha and Malia, and Michelle's mother during spring and summer breaks. I'm not Trump supporter, but as long as there are no rules, laws, or regulations on what the first family is or isn't allowed to do, then they have the right to do what they want. And I'll say again, there are no regulations that say a person cannot run for President if they are a NYC resident.
|
|
Rhondito
Pearl Clutcher
MississipPea
Posts: 4,660
Jun 25, 2014 19:33:19 GMT
|
Post by Rhondito on Nov 20, 2016 21:27:32 GMT
The Obama home in Chicago is very different from Trump Tower. There aren't other families and businesses in the Obama home, people coming and going all day, every day. Trump Tower is going to have to be secure at all times, otherwise who's to say someone couldn't come in and set up a bomb, or whatever, while the family isn't there and then blow the President away when he returns. I know it's going to be expensive, and it's going to be a pain in the ass, but after all is said and done there are no stipulations in place stating if you live in NYC you can't run for President because of the potential security costs and difficulties. While not ideal, he and his family have the right to the same security as any other President. If it appeared that I was trying to say that the Trump family doesn't have the right to security or that a NYC should be prevented from running for president, that was not my intention. I also didn't mean to imply that the Fifth Avenue in NYC and the Kenwood neighborhood in Chicago are identical. This is what I was trying to say: Based in my experience, I was questioning the claim of another poster that security would be the same in the Trump home and neighborhood whether or not the family is onsite. I would be interested in any information you have that explains how/why a NYC residence/neighborhood would require the same level of security with/without family presence.No, no - I didn't take your post to mean that at all. ETA: To answer your question... Because it is such a huge tourist mecca and the enormous amount of people out and about at any given time. Plus, add in the fact that Trump Tower is (for lack of a better word) a public building to some degree.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 12:47:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 21:46:43 GMT
If people continue to speak out, the politicians will not be able to ignore this. Absolutely. And if they are going to insist on way more special arrangements and severe disruptions to NYC, then they can damned well pay for it themselves. Trump and many others have raged and harped for years about the federal deficit, the state of our economy, and Government waste. They don't get to ignore that issue now and demand that the little people pay for something extra and out of the ordinary. Especially if the very early preliminary cost estimates are already in the tens of millions of dollars. If they're paying, it's all good. If they're not, the issue will continue to be a problem. Then the Obamas need to pay for all of the overseas trips the First Lady took with Sascha and Malia, and Michelle's mother during spring and summer breaks. I'm not Trump supporter, but as long as there are no rules, laws, or regulations on what the first family is or isn't allowed to do, then they have the right to do what they want. And I'll say again, there are no regulations that say a person cannot run for President if they are a NYC resident. I don't have enough information on how out of the ordinary vacation trips were for the Obamas as a Presidential family. I don't think they took more than any other First family, and don't think that they increased the cost of their personal security by tens of millions of dollars (and that estimate could very well go up). But I'm happy to admit my error if I am wrong about that. I hope someone can point out the costs of any travel that the Obamas did that they need to pay for. I suspect it won't be anywhere near the cost of what the Trumps are incurring, or that it even exceeds that of any other President. I fully support that the Trumps' freedoms to do whatever they wish, as long as they assume personal responsibility for their choices. And I'll say again, that I and many others are not ok with them expecting U.S. taxpayers to foot unreasonably expensive costs for their whims on where they live. Where has anyone (here on this board, or even anywhere else?) ever made that claim?
|
|
Rhondito
Pearl Clutcher
MississipPea
Posts: 4,660
Jun 25, 2014 19:33:19 GMT
|
Post by Rhondito on Nov 20, 2016 21:54:45 GMT
Where has anyone (here on this board, or even anywhere else?) ever made that claim? By people complaining about the costs and logistical disruptions to NYC because that's where the Trumps reside. I agree, it is going to be a nightmare, but it is what it is.
|
|