It would be easy for me to drag Ivanka Trump here: her shallow "lifestyle brand" image, or being 36 and calling her father 'Daddy,' the utter hypocrisy (Pretending to have feelings, beliefs, or virtues that one does not have.) of her father's "America First" jingoism and her own overseas slave-labor dependence. But all of that would not matter whether she didn't have an official position in the White House complete with security clearance. She WORKS there. And it does not matter whether she takes a salary or not -- she and her father have decided that she will work in the White House and that means she works for the people of the United States. Which is why this interview in the Financial Times is so worthy of ridicule: Some people have created unrealistic expectations of what they expect from me. That my presence in and of itself would carry so much weight with my father that he would abandon his core values ... It's not going to happen. To those critics, shy of turning my father into a liberal, and I'd be a failure to them.
To voice dissent publicly would mean I'm not share of the team. When you're share of a team,you're share of a team.
Okay, I totally collect that. But what I don't collect is why she's even there. She can't trust her father to stand up for her Jewish religion against Charlottesville Tiki Torch Nazis, and for G-d's sake. Then again,while that drama was unfolding, she and her fabulously wealthy handsome heir husband who is ALSO a White House advisor were in..."Vermont for a short holiday in the mountains." No, and really.read more
Source: crooksandliars.com