First Daughters: MSM Politically Boosts Chelsea, Smears Ivanka

The fact that Chelsea Clinton, daughter of two-term President Bill Clinton and two-time loser Hillary Clinton, is being heavily promoted as some kind of rising political star across almost every spectrum of our national media, is not in doubt. Her every utterance, even the confusing ones, are hailed and bolstered by our media as The Gospel Of The Up And Coming Social Justice Warrior, as pronouncements from American Royalty.

And yet, what has Chelsea ever accomplished — other than, you know, failure? NBC News paid her $50,000 a month to do absolutely nothing — they still let her go. She helped to manage the racket known as the Clinton Foundation, which is now in a corruption death spiral. Both Chelsea and her husband promoted a hedge fund that is now belly up.

Born on third base. All that money. All that fame. All that media love, and all Chelsea can succeed at is winning board seats she earned only through her parents’ cronies and tweeting out things that hit our political media’s sweet spot for all thing left-wing and Clinton.

While there is no question Ivanka Trump was also born on third base, her accomplishments are legion. Fashion, design, fragrance, and helping to run her father’s very successful company. Sure, like most of us, she has had her share of failure, who hasn’t? But that Ivanka is a prominent, respected, and accomplished businesswoman is not in doubt.

But now that President Trump is adding Ivanka to his White House team as an adviser, a role she proved successful at when her father won the presidency, the very same MSM that slobbers over #ChelseaFail is out to destroy and smear Ivanka. The left-wing Politico’s response is typical of what we are seeing everywhere:

Ivanka Trump, who moved to Washington saying she would play no formal role in her father’s administration, is now officially setting up shop in the White House. …

The arrangement, however, was greeted with more questions about what freedoms Trump was trying to preserve for herself — and why.

“They’re not saying she’s going to voluntarily subject herself to ethics rules to be nice,” said Norm Eisen, the former ethics czar in the Obama administration. “There’s recognition that they’re in very uncertain territory here. The better thing to do would be to concede she is subject to the rules. It would create some outside accountability, because if she can voluntarily subject herself to the rules, she can voluntarily un-subject herself to the rules.” …

But in the White House, the unprecedented arrangement for a child of the president has raised new questions about potential conflicts of interest — and about why Ivanka Trump can’t simply join the administration as a government employee. Her husband, Jared Kushner, serves as an official senior adviser in the White House and was sworn in, but his hiring also raised questions of whether it violated anti-nepotism laws. The Justice Department ruled that those laws applied only to agency appointments.

Trump will receive no salary or official title. She’ll have a White House office and the necessary security clearance required to properly serve as a adviser.

Also note how the media pounces on “children of a president,” a distinction without a difference from the same media that gushed over Bill Clinton announcing a two-for-one deal with Hillary as co-president, or at the very least, a close adviser.

During her husband’s first term, the unelected Hillary even took the legislative lead in pushing a massive government takeover of our health care system.

Tell me, what is the legal or moral difference between a daughter or wife in such a position?

We all know the answer..

Only the “D” after their name.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.