Posted on 03/09/2017 10:22:10 PM PST by ransomnote
A group named Sleeping Giants is maintaining a list of businesses who agree not to advertise on Breitbart. The spreadsheet linked was referenced by a document from February touting the boycott of Ivanka and Trump owned businesses. Democrats believe that in order to keep your job or business, you have to be a democrat.
Not surprisingly, AARP is also on that list.
I will continue to ignore the monthly junk mail solicitations they send me, for life insurance.
In the dumper!
Wow. Business opportunity. We know what stocks to short.
No one has attacked Don and come out a winner.
Mail all self addressed envelopes with other
junk mail stuffed inside, back to them.
an organized boycott reeks of illegality, also criminality in my humble opinion...
maybe Breitbart’s lawyers should make a few moves now that they apparently have proof and witnesses ? or the Justice Department? or?
“an organized boycott reeks of illegality, also criminality in my humble opinion...”
What laws does a boycott or choosing not to frequent a business break?
there are some possible theories under anti-trust law (Federal Trade Commission prosecutions including in some instances organized plots to withhold patronage or advertising, also of course DOJ AntiTrust Division), and the RICO act has some interesting possibilities. (Plus several states have laws that may also apply.) More statutes could come into play. It would all depend on the nature of the available evidence, there are some rather fine distinctions in some cases that would have to be examined ...
That’s for starters, of course there’s always the good old common law conspiracy doctrine, too...
So Finnair, Easy Jet, Campbell Soup, and Ethan Alan all feel more comfortable advertising with the Left. It’s crazy crazy.
“(Federal Trade Commission prosecutions including in some instances organized plots to withhold patronage or advertising, also of course DOJ AntiTrust Division)”
Except for Obamacare, there are no federal laws that require a person to patronize a certain business or for a company to buy advertising on a particular media outlet. Boycotts are legal and we are all free to boycott a business.
We aS individuals are free to buy or not buy Yes. But there can be antitrust and racketeering and conspiracy considerations when it comes to organizing or directing boycotts.
Lots of foreign businesses that hardly anyone in the US would do business with.
They are hard core progressive commie gay libs.
We're all better off not riding on Easy Jet and Finnair. So no great loss there.
By and large it's a stupid move because it permanently alienates half your customers.
Good question. In a free country we are allowed to vote with our feet and vote with our pocket books every day.
That is government by the people far more than voting for politicians once every 2 or 4 years.
When KMart replaced their spokesperson, a gun toting sex symbol with an anti-gun barf symbol, we voters voted against KMart and drove it into bankruptcy.
When Ackmann tried to turn JCPenneys into Abercrummy and Filth we voted against Ackmann and he lost a couple Billion dollars.
We continually vote for Chik-fil-A and Hobby Lobby and Bed-Bath-and-Beyond.
My Pillow is Pro-Trump and winning many voters. I’ve asked local Bed-Bath-and-Beyond and Walmart and they report that his expensive American made pillow is out selling their cheap Chinese made pillows.
We should all take seriously the vote with our feet and vote with our pocket books.
Iv’e been doing that for years. I despise AARP
Does sending it back to them by refusing it make them pay the mailing cost again?
**** Newegg.
“But there can be antitrust and racketeering and conspiracy considerations when it comes to organizing or directing boycotts.”
You mean to tell me, that Franklin Graham can be charged under RICO for promoting a boycott of Beauty and the Beast?
RICO is a bit complicated and usually looks to some previous record of racketeering activities ... so I doubt Franklin can be successfully prosecuted under it (although of course the previous anti-Christian WashDC administration would have LOVED to try, ha! The fact that they did not attempt it speaks to the difficulty of a successful RICO prosecution without a past criminal record. Also, there is a distinction between “merely advocating” a boycott (”free speech defense”) and actually “organizing” or “enforcing” one. I think Franklin can sleep peacefully on this ...smile smile smile. He is forthright like his Dad, I like him.
You haven’t noticed the “Degenerate” on the front of B B and BY”s latest mailer then have you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.