A San Francisco- based clothing designer is suing Ivanka Trump because she has an “unfair advantage” in marketing her clothing line because she is the president’s daughter. Is there any shock that this bullshit hails from California?
I would counter that she is at a disadvantage by virtue of her parentage, as Nordstrom has stopped selling her brand. That did not stop her line’s sales from blowing up; in fact, it caused it. But whether or not being Donald Trump’s daughter is an advantage or disadvantage when marketing a product is really beside the point. The idea here is that a company is suing because someone’s notoriety is helping them turn a profit.
The company alleges that Kellyanne Conway telling people to “to go buy Ivanka’s stuff” was illegal, as was Donald Trump denouncing Nordstrom’s decision to drop Ivanka’s line. Apparently a man having an opinion on how his daughter is treated is unfair if that man is in a position of power, and a government employee cannot express her opinion on a friend’s business. There are no allegations that Ivanka paid them for advertising. This was just family and friends sticking up for someone who was getting fucked with by a company that wanted to preen for the social justice warriors. Apparently, public office or government employment means you cannot have personal opinions, or at a minimum, cannot express them. Funny, nobody sued Obama when he tried to help Chicago land the next Olympics or when he constantly invited Jay-Z and Beyoncé to the White House, which could easily be construed as a product endorsement. Rule for thee and not for me is standard liberal bullshit, though.
This is the result of two generations of liberal brainwashing and propagandizing. It boils down to these fucking imbeciles thinking that they do not like the Trump administration and so anything Trump or his people do should be seen as illegal. Note that they want Ivanka’s products banned in California. How on earth libtards think it should be legal to sell marijuana in California when the it’s a federal crime, but perfectly fine to make sale of a clothing brand illegal because it belongs to the wrong person is beyond me. Do not be shocked if one of these radical fucktard judges in California okays it though.
This is related to the Hawaiian judge who blocked Trump’s new immigration ban. His argument essentially states that anyone in the world has the right to enter the USA, and restricting anyone from entering is both illegal and immoral. Since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, being able to define borders and guard them has been seen as a basic right of a nation. We are not far off from the time when liberals dispense with all formalities of legal tradition and just start trying to rule by fiat.
I think Trump needs to go full Andrew Jackson. When the Worcester v. Georgia ruling went against him, Old Hickory is said to exclaimed, “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” The federal court system is not a legislative or executive authority, and it is time someone reminded these pompous, wanna-be-dictator cock gobblers of it.