Trumps people really dont get it.
 

So his wife is now suing the Daily Mail.

I am not familiar with the case and it may well have merit.

However her legal case is not to claim damages for the disstress caused to her and her family, no, the case argues that she should receive damages because of the loss of revenues to businesses that she has not even embarked on yet.

Does anyone find this slightly distasteful ?

So the relentless Trump circus rolls on........:helpme

Melania Trump re-files Daily Mail lawsuit over 'lost business opportunities' - BBC News

The media flat out lied about her and slandered her

Ergo, she is suing them

Grasping at straws much again are you little man?

no, i suggest you crawl back under that Trump rock as it´s you grasping at straws.


No one on earth can see the future, and bad advertising is sometimes good advertising. So how the fuck can anyone say "for future business".

The Trump train continues...

I wondered when she was going to emerge from the cesspit of Trump´s tea party :1orglaugh

What are you talking about and who are you talking to?

Seems to me like Melania Trump is trying to use her position as first lady to make money, which is.... distasteful.

Every time I turn around it seems like Trump is making money. They are renting space to the Secret Service in Trump tower, now the DOD is also renting space, the hotel in Washington, Conway hawking Trump's daughter's crap, and now this crap with Melania....

This should be thrown out of court. Because someone said something bad about her does not mean it will lower potential profits in the future. Hell, people say bad stuff about Trump every day.

The Daily Mail said she used to be a high end escort/prostitute

That is false. That is slander. They should be sued into the ground.

lol you mucking idiot :1orglaugh:1orglaugh they said she worked as a prostitute for christs sake! Can you imagine if someone said that about michelle monkey hands obama? The liberals would have a hissy fit

It's called slander/libel...it's far different than saying something "bad" about someone. They reported it as fucking news, which is why they are FAKE NEWS

This kind of case is called a SLAAP case. Trump is famous for these no merit cases that are illegal in California. I've had 2 cases like this filed against me in the past.

In short the case is only to cost money in legal fees for the defendant, so much so, over a long period of time, that they run out of money and settle or "bend to the will" of the plantiff.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stra..._participation

They reported that she was a PROSTITUTE ...

and .... ???

She did marry a Don , after all ....

Any publicity is good publicity :upsidedow

That in itself makes her claim of damages a bit ludicrous :upsidedow

classy flotus :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

so obviously you wouldn't mind if AVN published a fake story that you for example peddle cp on the side? that obviously wouldn't be slander, they would be doing you a favor! after all "any publicity is good publicity"! publishing such a fake story wouldn't damage your reputation at all, it would do the opposite, it would catapult your career to new levels! so seeking damages for "lost business opportunities" would be "ludicrous"... :error :helpme

she is

she has sex with Donald for money

Oh Jonny, I know you dont read so good, so I will explain again.

As I said previously, the case may have merit, The Daily Mail may well have slandered her. That was not the point I was making.

But making a claim for loss of future business earnings for companies that do not yet exist, rather than taking a high moral stance as First Lady, shows that not only is the Trump circus determined to make as much money as possible from being POTUS, but the whole attitude within their camp of lawyers and advisors is rotten to the core.

Who the fuck thought this was a good idea ?

"I'm so glad they never leaked my nudie pics. My gray muff would've really gotten the boys in the Senate all worked up."

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/im.../05/bush.2.jpg

"OH MY LORD! I spoke too soon!"

http://up.xhamster.com/000/012/512/839_1000.jpg

If it had been Michelle slandered like that. The liberals would have been going crazy.

Trump is held to different rules, such as.

Obama banned migrants from certain countries, not a murmur.

Countless politicians have had their hands in the till, not a murmur.

And more.

Oh shit...

Well Markham turns up and misses the whole point of the thread. Who would have thought that would happen.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

If that is your logic you are dumb as a box of rocks

Libel is written word and slander is spoken word.

Not too bright huh.

It's their family tradition. Sue Sue Sue

libel/slander, close enough, you know what was meant... the logic is sound, being associated with objectionable/illegal activities usually results in "lost business opportunities", not "any publicity is good publicity" like you claimed, doesn't matter if it's prostitution, cp, crack dealing or whatever else... so there is nothing "ludicrous" about the lawsuit...

can you point out where the flaw in the logic is?

bla bla bla you sound like your back-peddling buddy Trump.

FakeNews and alternate facts :

He did not ban " migrants " from those countries , he instaured tighter process , a 2 year vetting process . Should have seen it , BLADEWIRE posted it here tons of times.

As attack on Michele Obama , if she would of had the conduct of Melania , she would have been burned on the public place , while the Tea Party and GPOP would have prayed the mercifull god ....

This is always used in slander lawsuits. It's like slander 101. Look the guy is a troll but it doesn't mean you throw away all logic and get blinded by the name Trump.

That doesn't make sense. If I say the guy rapes kids thats good publicity? You wouldn't sue me for slander?