Last I checked, President Trump didn't say he was speaking to the league owners who are Democrats. So please explain how the statement made by the President was meant to influence things solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation? From where I'm sitting, this appears to be just another "the President is trying to ban all Muslims from entering..." kind of thing. One of the more insidious aspects of TDS is the inability of sufferers to read and comprehend fairly basic ideas...
We all know how much Republicans are pro-protests. At least, they are pro-White Supremacy Protests (aka "very fine people").
18 U.S. Code § 227 stipulates that any federal employee, member of Congress, or member of the executive branch is forbidden from using their position within the federal government to influence the employment decisions of a private business, solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation......snip~ Ooopsie. Reading is fun and mental. Just sayin!
Iy yiy yiy. OFFICIAL ACT means an act of government. FFS do I have to explain everything to you? No public official is recused from stating an opinion - by this or any other statute.
How do you think he broke this law? I suppose a president can be found in violation of this law, but he cannot be prosecuted.
Hard to prosecute Trump saying what should happen to the NFL players violating their own contracts that they signed which specifically state what they must do during the Anthem.
You left out this part - solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation. He doesn't know the party affiliation of those he suggested should be fired. Thread fail.
Nonsense. Trump is to be take seriously, not literally. It's like you guys will never figure out even the most plainly obvious. Amazing!
His own daughter expressed it... Hacked text messages allegedly sent by Paul Manafort's daughter discuss 'blood money' and killings, and a Ukrainian lawyer wants him to explain http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-manafort-daughter-text-messages-ukraine-2017-3
He didn't even call for it. He only acknowleged the feelings of his voter base in regards to the issue. "Wouldn't you love to see..." and gave a suggestion on what they could do about it "The only thing you could do better is if you see it, even if it’s one player, leave the stadium, I guarantee things will stop."
How can private employers commit an official act if official acts only apply to government, when the statute in question specifically says it applies to Private employers?