AINSLEY EARHARDT (CO-HOST): The mainstream media is taking aim at Ivanka Trump over her seat at the G20 table.
[...]
Are Democrats reigniting the war on women? Here to debate this Democratic strategist Christy Setzer and Washington Times columnist Madison Gesiotto. Thank you both for being with us. Well, Christie, I will start with you, as the Democrat that we are talking to this morning, they're acting like she is a kid. She is a White House adviser to the president of the United States. She has a successful business, she went to Wharton Business School, she's a senior adviser to her father. What is so wrong? Why is the left so upset about her sitting in for her dad at this meeting briefly.
CHRISTY SETZER: She's an unpaid advisor. Let's be clear about that. But, --
EARHARDT: Because she doesn't want to take money from the government.
SETZER: Right, right. But the point is,that look, this isn't really about Ivanka, per se. This is about the fact that we have someone who has been confirmed by the Senate to take the president's place on the world stage when he can't. The guy's name is Rex Tillerson. He is the secretary of state. And the reason why people are sort of freaking out about the fact that Ivanka took the president's place as opposed to Rex Tillerson or someone, say, who is in our cabinet or, you know, a U.S. Senator, or someone like that who has actually been elected is because this sends a very strong signal to the world about who actually has power in our government. Who is actually trusted. The fact that it is the president's daughter as opposed to again, someone else with more official power, is disconcerning to a lot of people. Because, again, this is not a monarchy. This is not a dictatorship. We live in a democracy where the president's family does not automatically have power conferred upon them just because the president does.
[...]
EARHARDT: Do you think if a man, like a Rex Tillerson, had sat in that chair instead of Ivanka, instead of a female, would they be upset about it?
MADISON GESIOTTO: Absolutely not. I would like to take it a step further and say if another woman was sitting at that same table, say Chelsea Clinton, I think they would be touting her as a future presidential candidate. A figure of female empowerment. Let me go back to what Christie was saying before. I'm not really sure where to start breaking apart the logical flaws in her argument. To say someone is qualified because they are elected official is absolutely ridiculous. There are a lot of elected officials who wouldn't be qualified to be sitting at that table at the G20. And to take away from Ivanka's incredible accomplishments, and the fact that she is qualified to be sitting at that table I think is disrespectful to her.
