2020 Presidential Race

#86,453
#86,453
Velo Vol said:
Assuming that public officials are held to the same standard, what would meet the elements for business defamation here? Would repeating the claim that Dominion's servers were seized in Germany be enough?
Click to expand...
However, the answer to my question is included in Trump’s 3rd circuit filing: Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. is the plaintiff in the case. So no personal liability for members of the corporation... unless the corporation is shambolic and they didn’t follow the bylaws or whatever.

But what are the odds of that happening?
 
#86,455
#86,455
clarksvol00 said:
I wonder if people who have such forgiveness for the developer who stiffed his contractors have the same level of forgiveness for the random guy who stiffed his credit card company and hospital bills.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Normal people don't have the money to bribe congress; however, credit card companies and healthcare corporations have the much deeper pockets that help keep members of congress in office and keep them wanting to be reelected.
 
#86,457
#86,457
Delmar said:
That’s how he’s kept his money. Declaring bankruptcy, bilking contractors and “creative” tax returns. We’re about to find out more detail on item #3. Should be fun to watch him squirm. Now he’s added pleas for donations on the voter fraud fight to help pay campaign debts. Got to give him credit. He is creative when it comes to his con games.
Click to expand...

If the IRS can find problems with Trump's "creative" tax returns, good for them. Hard to believe they haven't tried. I'm a lot more concerned with how legislators get to multi millions on a salary that would never put them in that realm. You would think that includes speaking fees, books, foundations, etc.

§ 2635.702 Use of public office for private gain.
An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

(a) Inducement or coercion of benefits. An employee shall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office in a manner that is intended to coerce or induce another person, including a subordinate, to provide any benefit, financial or otherwise, to himself or to friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737
#86,458
#86,458
AM64 said:
If the IRS can find problems with Trump's "creative" tax returns, good for them. Hard to believe they haven't tried. I'm a lot more concerned with how legislators get to multi millions on a salary that would never put them in that realm. You would think that includes speaking fees, books, foundations, etc.
Click to expand...

X 1,000,000,000
 
#86,459
#86,459
AM64 said:
Congress wrote the rules. People like Trump may have lobbied congress, and congress liked the bribes well enough to comply, but in the end congress wrote the bankruptcy law. Blame the rules makers not the people who used the bent rules.
Click to expand...

D4DA66C4-95BF-41A1-9ACE-B95A6971C4A9.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#86,460
#86,460
RockyTop85 said:
I’m not sure I understand your question.

Are you asking what statement would give dominion a cause of action?

I don’t think that one would because it’s too oblique and doesn’t seem to directly defame them. Honestly haven’t touched this stuff in years and the law school classes and bar review mostly focused on public figures. I’ll try to look it up at some point.
Click to expand...
Or more broadly, the emerging "populist" rhetorical war against Big Tech. One can easily imagine politicians making false claims about Facebook, Google. You ever hear anything and think, "defamation"?
 
#86,462
#86,462
  • Like
Reactions: titansvolsfaninga and BenGrimm
#86,463
#86,463
volfanhill said:
Well Trump cashed on his family name and dads bailouts
Click to expand...

There is a difference between taking advantage of tax laws and estate planning compared to getting rich off your work as a government official.

My wife’s grandfather estate planned in California during the 80s. Thankfully we won’t have to pay as much in taxes(inheritance) due to his forsight.

Not directing this at you.

What amazes me, is how poor / middle class people don’t see when you start tightening the laws in regards to taxes it is only going to make it harder to become rich(money wise). The advantages someone had 15 years ago are no longer there for you if and when you make it big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#86,464
#86,464
Velo Vol said:
Or more broadly, the emerging "populist" rhetorical war against Big Tech. One can easily imagine politicians making false claims about Facebook, Google. You ever hear anything and think, "defamation"?
Click to expand...
No, not yet. Most of the populist big tech rhetoric is that bizarro 1A and Section 230 garbage. The claim that they’re biased in their moderating is too nebulous and opinionated and not really related to how they make their money.

The “wayfair sells children” was pretty bad, but the people saying it weren’t worth suing.

The situation here seemed more primed for litigation because you have an apparent agent (Powell) of an entity (Trump Campaign) bringing in millions of dollars, acting in her official capacity, making assertions of fact, that go directly to that corporation’s core competency, and are influential for their target customers (state governments).

Again, not my area of law. Whenever I take something new I almost always end up regretting it for some reason or another. So somebody who actually does 1A litigation would have a better opinion than me.

I don’t think there will be a lawsuit, I do think it’s plausible that their lawyers sent something to the campaign and Trump’s real lawyers told him he had some possible exposure from Powell’s comments and that’s why they threw her off the bus.
 
#86,467
#86,467
headhunter15 said:
Click to expand...

sad thing is people don't read the actual stories....only the headlines. Her tweet if from November....the headline is from October 21st. 500 Billion was less than what the White House and the Senate Democrats proposed. The WH propsed 1.8 Trillion, while the Senate Democrats proposed 2.2 Trillion. Both wanted more money to combat the virus and help the States. Of course, Senate Republicans want to do the bare minimum to make it seem like they are doing something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#86,469
#86,469
AM64 said:
I get where he believes in working with allies, but his thought that we shouldn't put our country first is absolutely wrong. It sounds like he's another proponent of globalism - a failed policy. WW2 showed that the US can be a strong ally, but only when we put the country first - it wasn't just our military might or our ability to supply fresh troops, but more our industrial might and national resolve. We didn't capitulate to Churchill's Europe first and Japan later; we had the resources and the determination to fight on two fronts - a strong ally, but with our own needs first.

My original defense of Mattis was not really him specifically as military leaders in general - they aren't timid, but they generally haven't been hawks looking for a war.
Click to expand...
When has America ever not been first? Hell, America always puts its interest above the interest of anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Dread and tvolsfan
#86,473
#86,473
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top