Trump sues everyone - demands to be back on social media

[Runs For Fun]

Florida Man sues Facebook, Twitter, YouTube for account ban

Golf fan has opinions on America's First Amendment and Section 230

www.theregister.com

Clever!

 

[User.168]

.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

4. There is no definable financial loss, you can't sue for hurt feelings.

You could actually argue the opposite as he continues to ask for donations to fund these lawsuit scams and the rubes continue to empty their pockets.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

What we need is a hacker to highjack TV airwaves and across all channels air a short Mr. Rogers style explanation of the 1st amendment and how it doesn’t apply here, preferably during a Tucker Carlson broadcast.

Bonus, watching as the government either tries to prosecute the crime or quickly ignore and bury it. "This criminal act of explaining our government to the people can not go unpunished!!"

 

[mac_in_tosh]

Trump reportedly tried to enlist the DOJ to stop Saturday Night Live from satirizing him. You know, from treating him "unfairly." So he's all for illegally limiting what others say but objects to legally being banned from social media for his outright lying.

 

[hulugu]

I am sure youtube, facebook and twitter will be surprised to find out that they are now de-facto government institutions. What is the process for the shareholders to be reimbursed now that these 3 have been nationalised by the US?

Yeah, the lawyering on this bit is just WTAFBBQ.

More notably, this probably tells us that their attempts to get around the ban have failed, and that the social media project that Trump Inc. crowed about is not getting off the ground.

In short, the ban is working.

 

[Edd]

Trump says his class-action lawsuits are a victory for free speech

He reiterated his belief that Silicon Valley was conspiring against him.

www.politico.com

I assume the fault is mine, but there was a time I thought Maria Bartiromo was “not-insane”, but she now ranks among the worst of Trump’s ass-kissers. She didn’t always work at Fox. The $ to bring her into the fold must have been sweet.

 

[hulugu]

Trump says his class-action lawsuits are a victory for free speech

He reiterated his belief that Silicon Valley was conspiring against him.

www.politico.com

I assume the fault is mine, but there was a time I thought Maria Bartiromo was “not-insane”, but she now ranks among the worst of Trump’s ass-kissers. She didn’t always work at Fox. The $ to bring her into the fold must have been sweet.

Bartiromo is one of those figures that I think undermine the idea that cable news is a bastion of liberalism. FCS, her supervisor was Lou Dobbs at CNN in the early 1990s. And, there were big questions about how chummy she was with major CEOs even while covering the financial sector as the "Money Honey."

 

[JayMysteri0]

Lawsuits & NDAs tend to be more effective if you win them.

Trump Loses N.D.A. Battle with Omarosa, Must Pay Her Legal Fees

A New York arbitrator ruled Monday that former President Donald Trump can not enforce a nondisclosure agreement with his ex-White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman.

blackamericaweb.com

A New York arbitrator ruled Monday that former President Donald Trump can not enforce a nondisclosure agreement with his ex-White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman.

Per NBC News, the arbitrator noted that the terms of the nondisclosure agreement were “highly problematic” because it did not adhere to typical legal standards, describing it as “vague, indefinite, and therefore void and unenforceable.”

“The Agreement effectively imposes on [Manigault Newman] an obligation to never say anything remotely critical of Mr. Trump, his family or his or his family members’ businesses for the rest of her life,” arbitrator, T. Andrew Brown, said in the ruling.

“The statements do not disclose hard data such as internal polling results or donor financial information,” Brown wrote. “Rather, they are for the most part simply expressions of unflattering opinions, which are deemed ‘confidential information’ based solely upon the designation of Mr. Trump. This is exactly the kind of indefiniteness which New York courts do not allow to form the terms of a binding contract.”

Brown said Trump’s campaign has to pay Manigault Newman’s legal fees.

Manigault Newman and her attorney released statements noting that “Donald has used this type of vexatious litigation to intimidate, harass and bully for years! Finally the bully has met his match!”

“Clearly, I am very happy with this ruling,” Manigault Newman said.

Trump’s campaign filed an arbitration complaint against Manigault Newman in New York City in 2018, following the release of her book, “Unhinged: An Insider’s Account of the Trump White House.” In it, she called Trump a racist.

Trump’s campaign accused her of being in breach of a 2016 confidentiality agreement

It will be interesting to see if others fight their NDAs to join the long list of potential authors who need to redeem themselves for future employment.

 

[thekev]

Lawsuits & NDAs tend to be more effective if you win them.




It will be interesting to see if others fight their NDAs to join the long list of potential authors who need to redeem themselves for future employment.

You know, this part gets me. All of these jackasses that follow the guy talk about their 1A rights whenever they're banned from social media, yet support someone who presents contracts that impose entirely arbitrary restrictions. I imagine Trump viewed the ambiguity as a feature, as it allows him to sue over any perceived slight rather than disclosure of confidential information.

Personally, I would prefer that Congress pass a law banning politicians and political candidates from using their own NDAs on anything related to their office. Confidentiality is already legally required if it pertains to classified information, and it's difficult for me to think of any good reason why confidentiality standards involving things such as diplomatic communication should be set directly by the current president rather than legislation and existing precedent. From that view, Trump is simply a good example of why such standards should be in place, regardless of whatever other politicians leverage similar agreements.

“The statements do not disclose hard data such as internal polling results or donor financial information,” Brown wrote. “Rather, they are for the most part simply expressions of unflattering opinions, which are deemed ‘confidential information’ based solely upon the designation of Mr. Trump. This is exactly the kind of indefiniteness which New York courts do not allow to form the terms of a binding contract.”

 

[hulugu]

You know, this part gets me. All of these jackasses that follow the guy talk about their 1A rights whenever they're banned from social media, yet support someone who presents contracts that impose entirely arbitrary restrictions. I imagine Trump viewed the ambiguity as a feature, as it allows him to sue over any perceived slight rather than disclosure of confidential information.

Personally, I would prefer that Congress pass a law banning politicians and political candidates from using their own NDAs on anything related to their office. Confidentiality is already legally required if it pertains to classified information, and it's difficult for me to think of any good reason why confidentiality standards involving things such as diplomatic communication should be set directly by the current president rather than legislation and existing precedent. From that view, Trump is simply a good example of why such standards should be in place, regardless of whatever other politicians leverage similar agreements.

Yeah, NDAs for public office are bullshit. People have to accept them for clearances, but to require one for hanging out with a political campaign is just an attempt to bury bad behavior.

 

[Huntn]

Lawsuits & NDAs tend to be more effective if you win them.




It will be interesting to see if others fight their NDAs to join the long list of potential authors who need to redeem themselves for future employment.

Let the damning blabbing begin, ah, er continue!

 

[Pumbaa]

Let the damning blabbing begin, ah, er continue!

Wait, you want Trump back on social media?

 

[SuperMatt]

Wait, you want Trump back on social media?

Facebook decided they would just take their site off the internet rather than let Trump back on it.

 

[fooferdoggie]

Facebook decided they would just take their site off the internet rather than let Trump back on it.

that has to be better then listening to his winy babby ass.

 

[lizkat]

If they let Trump back on Twitter, I will voluntarily just delete my own account from that platform.

MyTwitter feed has been a somewhat more reasonable thing to scroll through ever since Trump was banned. For one thing the professional news media accounts that are most of what I follow don't get to lay back and just retweet his tweets any more. A real blessing.

 

[Huntn]

Wait, you want Trump back on social media?

Negatory, I’m referencing the broken non-disclosure agreements and subsequent tell all books emerging.

 

[JayMysteri0]

that has to be better then listening to his winy babby ass.

That's just it, where are you hearing his "winy babby ass"?

Cause it sure ain't on FB or Twitter, he closed his blog / site because no one gave a shit to go there & read his babbling.

If you only have to hear from him when some media decides to give him time, that's fine.

Newsletters are making a comeback, if he wasn't such a luddite he'd realize there's a fortune to be made there.
Seriously. Look up Substack, they'd bear children spontaneously for him on the spot if he wanted to sign up.

 

[fooferdoggie]

whats good is trump is getting sued by everyone thats the way it should be.

 

[Yoused]

“The statements do not disclose hard data such as internal polling results or donor financial information,” Brown wrote. “Rather, they are for the most part simply expressions of unflattering opinions …” … Trump’s campaign filed an arbitration complaint against Manigault Newman in New York City in 2018, following the release of her book, “Unhinged: An Insider’s Account of the Trump White House.” In it, she called Trump a racist.

It will be interesting to see if others fight their NDAs to join the long list of potential authors who need to redeem themselves for future employment.

OK, there may be a bit of a risk here. That is a pretty well-established fact, not an "opinion". But not really any kind of insider information, either, though.