Donald Trump unleashes raging 12-tweet barrage, threatens lawsuit at 'irrelevant' rival

businessinsider.com ^ | Colin Campbell

[RoosterRedux]

Politico reported earlier in the evening that a pro-Kasich super PAC was planning to unload $2.5 million or more to take down Trump, the Republican front-runner, in New Hampshire.

This prompted a dozen-tweet barrage by Trump against Kasich, ripping the PAC's attack as "pathetic" and calling the governor a "dud" over the report, among many other things.

*snip*

The super PAC, New Day for America, published a letter from The Trump Organization's lawyer warning that Trump would promptly seek "legal action" against the committee if its ads lied about Trump.

"It has come to my attention that you plan on producing and disseminating certain radio, television, and newspaper advertisements directly and personally attacking my client," Trump's lawyer, Alan Garten, wrote in the letter, which was also addressed to the Kasich campaign.

"Please be advised that in the event your ads contain any false, misleading, defamatory or otherwise tortious statements or representations concerning Mr. Trump's business or his brand, we will not hesitate to seek immediate legal action," it continued.

The letter concluded: "Please be guided accordingly."

The letter was similar in nature to a September cease-in-desist letter The Trump Organization sent to a conservative group, the Club for Growth, that ran attack ads against Trump in Iowa. Some eyebrows were raised because the letter was sent from Trump's corporation rather than from his campaign.

[erod]

John “He Who Has No Chance” Kasich is attempting to take down Trump because he HAS to win New Hampshire and Trump is the front runner in the campaign. I don’t like Kasich, he’s a scum bag, but this is the way a campaign goes down and Kasich wants the nomination otherwise he wouldn’t be running. If you’re a candidate, you’re in it to win it, and attack ads are used against your opponent to harm them and drag them down in the polls so you can win the race.

[Kenny]

‘Twitter

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
Watch Kasich squirm -— if he is not truthful in his negative ads I will sue him just for fun!

[Guenevere]

I said I hope you are not from ...the other side.

you just sound like them.

[HarleyLady27]

I don’t mind seeing that, and have said it quite a few times on here, however, that being said, if you have people on here throwing Cruz into the gutter with their ‘vile’ remarks that put Cruz there, it isn’t good for Cruz...

People will turn away from people that use ‘vile’ remarks to support their candidate or candidates...don’t let that happen if you are supporting that certain candidate...

Trump supporters are above this, and do not do this...and if they do, we take care of it...

GO TRUMP GO!!!

[Amntn]

What would you expect him to say?

You are letting your own animus toward Trump cloud your thinking.

[MortMan]

Something has to curb the misleading and outright dishonest words used in ads.

Absent the ability to arrange duels, I’m not seeing much of any way to curb the lies.

Do you have ideas on that front?

[Boogieman]

“Kashich is trying to involve Trumps Company and Trade Mark Name in his ads, which is illegal....”

No it’s not, read up on “Fair Use”.

[rwoodward]

Trump battles his opponents by his own words during interviews and campaign rallys. The RINOs know that nobody is paying attention to them so there only option is multi-million dollar repetitive TV ads.

[C. Edmund Wright]

pparently you, like Rove and the rest of GOPe, think the "conservative thing to do" is bend over and take it.

That's ridiculous, and like everything you say, totally without any intellectual back up.

I say fight like a man, not a girl.....and you're defending Mr. Tough Guy even when he runs crying to the teacher. WAAAAAA WAAAAAAA WAAAAAAA

[RoosterRedux]

I think for a public figure, the standard for libel is much higher and there must be an element of 'actual malice'.

That is true to the best of my knowledge.

I am not a lawyer but I think that "actual malice" is based on foreknowledge that what is being said is a lie and/or a reckless disregard for the truth.

What Trump's lawyer is doing is warning these parties that what they might be saying in an ad is a lie...and that draws in the "foreknowledge of the truth" as well as the "reckless disregard for the truth" issues.

It's not so much a matter of who would win such a suit as it is a warning that such actions might lead to serious legal entanglement.

In warning all opponents to be alert to the use of lies in ads or otherwise, he is raising the "reckless disregard for the truth" issue and putting them on notice that he is willing to defend himself in court.

Very smart move considering the GOPe will try to play dirty. This will give them pause.

[C. Edmund Wright]

I like Trump a WHOLE LOT BETTER than I like some of his most bot like worshipful knee pad fanbois.

But this was a bad move.....some of us are man enough to admit it....some are not.

[HarleyLady27]

Trademark

A trademark, trade mark, or trade-mark is a recognizable sign, design, or expression which identifies products or services of a particular source from those of others, although trademarks used to identify services are usually called service marks. The trademark owner can be an individual, business organization, or any legal entity.

And Trump Trade Mark is not for ‘Fair Use’ it doesn’t fall under that usage.... Trump Trade Marks are for the Golf Courses, Resorts, Hotels, Products plus his Children’s Foundations, it is a World Wide Trump Trade Mark...and can’t be ‘fair use’.....

[firebrand]

Maybe Kasich can get the hero of John Grisham’s new book to take the case—you know, the one who will defend anybody.

[DoughtyOne]

Cruz is a straight up Conservative. How do you think straight up Conservatives fare against these primary voters?

Democrats
Independents
Moderate Republicans (who think of Tea Party members as terrorists)
Conservatives (who are certain Ted Can't win and will vote for Trump instead)

Your guy is toast in the primaries. If you think I'm just making up a pipe dream here to support my candidate, think of this.

In 32 years we haven't nominated a Conservative person to represent our party. Why is that? Does history matter? Can we learn from history? Should we?

You are trashing the one guy that is promoting our beliefs to tens of thousands of people at nearly every campaign stop. Why?

He pulls in people across demographic lines. Cruz does not.

If you listen to Trump campaign speeches, you'll hear Trump promote the same things Reagan did and more. REAGAN!

Why will you be happy to see a guy promoting Reagan's agenda be defeated?

Okay, so lets recap.

Cruz can't get the nomination due to the heavily Leftist participants in our primaries. Trump can, but you and others are doing your best to stop him.

Tell me how that is any different than exactly what the GOPe wants.

After the events in Paris on 11/13, I will be adding
this to my posts for the next week. I'm certain our
turn is coming again soon. We stand united against
Islamic extremists.

Some music for reflection if the mood strikes you.
Courtesy of: Kartographer
beautiful [02:23]

An honorable mention also goes out to Lassana Bathily , a Muslim immigrant from Mali.
Mr. Bathily sheltered customers at the Jewish Deli and helped police by providing info
on the terrorists, and providing the location of survivors in the deli.
Courtesy of: Tijeras_Slim

[erod]

If it's libel and slander he should sue, but I would encourage you to look at the ads that Club for Growth ran that Trump threatened to sue them over. There is noting in these ads that is libel and slander, it is Trump in his own words. I'm just saying that it's a slippery slope if candidates sue other candidates against attack ads that don't contain libel and Donald threatened to sue Club for Growth after they aired attack ads that featured Donald using his own words.

Trump sends cease-and-desist letter to Club For Growth

"https://www.youtube.com/embed/_OEijvTi0NE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

[fooman]

“foreknowledge of the truth”

Yes, the preemption then is VERY brilliant because Trump could then prove ‘Actual Malice’

[RoosterRedux]

You really think the country needs litigation between candidates injected into our politics?

Or put that another way: Do you think the law needs to be used by Trump to defend his candidacy from an libelous/tortious attack by the GOP establishment?

My answer to that would be "you're dam right."

[RoosterRedux]

Eggzactly!

[surroundedbyblue]

I totally agree with Trump on this. The Democrat and establishment GOP machines will bold faced lie about the non-establishment candidates and that includes Ted Cruz. Bravo to Trump for giving them a heads-up by saying “don’t eff with me”. It’s about time someone smacks these bullies.

[Moonman62]

I’m not saying lies should get promoted, but I have never seen a campaign season where a candidate files a lawsuit against another candidate for making an attack ad.

...

Trump may have close to $10 billion in assets. It’s wise to protect them and prevent them from being turned into a liability. Other candidates are still free to tell the truth if they want to attack him.