Bill's appointment of Hillary to task force is precedent for Kuschner...

So the unhinged left is arguing that Donald Trump cannot name his Son-in-law as an advisor because the law prohibits it. Some (who are really unhinged) are demanding that it should lead to impeachment.

Apparently they forgot that the person Donald Trump defeated for the Presidency was appointed to lead a task force on Health Care reform by her own Husband (who was President at the time). Moreover, they apparently haven't read the relative precedents for such as appointment.

In an obscure passage in that case, stemming from President Bill Clinton's appointment of his wife to head up health care reform efforts, two federal appeals court judges opined that a federal anti-nepotism law passed in 1967 did not appear to cover appointments to the White House staff. “We doubt that Congress intended to include the White House or the Executive Office of the President” in the anti-nepotism statute, D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman wrote in the 1993 decision joined by Judge Stephen Williams. "So, for example, a President would be barred from appointing his brother as Attorney General, but perhaps not as a White House special assistant.

http://openjurist.org/997/f2d/898/association-v-clinton

If we all remember correctly, Hillary Clinton did withstand legal challenges under that very law, and was allowed to hold her post as head of the Health Care Reform task force which brought us the ever-unpopular "Hillarycare" proposal that died a slow painful death.

So if Bill can appoint Hillary to a post within the Government, then certainly Trump can name his son-in-law to a post.

My guess is that the left is against the Kuschner pick for anti-semetic reasons.