"[The] plaintiff had the unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, as an extremely famous and well-known person, as well as a former professional model, brand spokesperson, and successful businesswoman, to launch a broad-based commercial brand in multiple product categories, each of which could have garnered multimillion-dollar business relationships for a multi-year term during which plaintiff is one of the most photographed women in the world."
Well, that really was embarrassing, that blatant statement of intent to cash in on that First Lady cachet.
Good thing she took that out. And I like how taking that out had the collateral effect of ousting that word you know I hate — click on the tag — garner.
February 23, 2017
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
31 comments:
"Well, that really was embarrassing, that blatant statement of intent to cash in on that First Lady cachet." You mean, as opposed to the low-key way Hillary Clinton tastefully refrained from cashing in on that First Lady cachet, and how Michelle Obama will take a vow of poverty and not cash in?
@Sebastian Show me where they put it starkly in words.
Not sure I garner your fascination with that word. ;-)
I am surprised at Althouse's fascination with the word 'garner'.
I am Laslo.
How do we know this is true? Plaintiff's lawyer leaked the draft? I say fake news.
I'll play Devil's Advocate and say that at least Melania was honest about the business opportunities of being First Lady. Hillary and Michelle use the platform but keep a ladylike hush over their hustle. The Trump crassness is a refreshing trait.
"Show me where they put it starkly in words." They certainly did not put it starkly in words, and I did not mean to imply otherwise. In fact, I already tried to give credit to Hillary for showing good taste and restraint, and implicitly expressed my confidence that Michelle wouldn't stoop so low as to make any blatant statement. I agree that trying to cash in on First Lady cachet by making blatant statements is deplorable.
A woman is being denied independent career and money she makes from her businesses.
Where is Feminism when it is needed? Should she settle for a rich husband?
A clear case of intent to garner. But it won't matter. And why would anybody expect it to?
If the refs are only calling fouls on one team and are continually enforcing very questionable calls on that team while ignoring blatant violations by the other team, after a while, the unfairness of the refs is so much more offensive to the sense of fair play of the fans and so much more influential on the outcome of the game than anything the players are doing, that the fans stop caring about the rules at all and just become angry. If the one-sided officiating goes on long enough, the fans will be on the field and the game will be over.
Does this mean Dolly Madison will have to divest herself of all those snack cakes she has garnered in that grain silo of hers?
Hack Comic Mic Nite...
"Trump, man... what a fucking mess we got into, right..? And have you seen this? His Slovenian mail-order bride is suing a newspaper based upon the money she would make selling her Brand as the First Lady... It's bad enough that Trump puts his name on everything, but now we're supposed to buy HER products...?
Hell, I got the perfect thing for her to sell: the Melania-brand douche. Because she's married to a douche-bag, right? You see where I'm going with this...?
Maybe she can also sell Luxury Adult Diapers for rich incontinent husbands... Look, I'm not saying Trump is incontinent, but he can't control his own mouth, what makes us think he can control his bowels...?
What is this world coming to, anyway? We're looking to a Slovenian mail-order bride for direction on what to buy? The only thing I would take her advice on is buying hot Slovenian mail-order brides, you know...?
These are just jokes, people: I mean no offense to our lovely First Lady: I LIKE having a First Lady I can finally jerk off to...
You've been a great audience, thank you for laughing...
I am Laslo.
Did someone say Garner?
Sounds like some clerk in her lawyers' offices may be looking for another job.
The Great State of Tennessee took action: in Tennessee v. Garner they determined that it's OK to use deadly force against anyone who says "garner".
That looks like the sort of thing lawyers are trained by their law professors to put in and embarrassed clients make them take out.
Hillary and Michelle use the platform but keep a ladylike hush over their hustle.
I'm sorry, making a claim about something is not the same as it being true. Please provide some examples where either Hillary or Michelle (or any other First Lady for that matter) used their position to personally enrich themselves.
Isn't that the work product of the English barrister/lawfirm hired to pursue the claim against the Daily Mail? Who said the Trumps had any part in composing that paragraph?
The greatest of adolescent arguments, "everbody else did it, you're pickin on me!"
"Broad-based" = "woman-owned"?
Ouch.
@ Frederick, how much money did the Clinton Foundation raise for Haitian relief? How much was actually spent in Haiti?
Please provide some examples where either Hillary or Michelle (or any other First Lady for that matter) used their position to personally enrich themselves.
My god ! You don't think the Clinton fortune came from her using her position to solicit bribes ? I've been describing you as intelligent.
Darrell said...
Isn't that the work product of the English barrister/lawfirm hired to pursue the claim against the Daily Mail? Who said the Trumps had any part in composing that paragraph?
No, it is the work of the Rodeo Drive (Hollywood, California) lawfirm that has been retained by the Trump family for a surprisingly large number of lawsuits and threatened litigation. The firm uses Melania Trump's name on its website. If the law firm screwed up badly in this instance, there is no evidence yet that it will cost them the Trump family business.
Then again, as this Newsweek article points out, Harder himself has essentially been a second-chair lawyer in the actual litigation of his highest-profile claims that went to trial.
http://www.newsweek.com/charles-harder-gawker-melania-trump-roger-ailes-people-magazine-509926
And so maybe the Plaintiff's co-counsel, Tarter, Krinsky & Drogan LLP of New York should be blamed for the inopportune language. It would be most likely that as local counsel they'd draft the Complaint, but in a document like that it is assured that Harder would have reviewed it before attaching an e-signature.
Charles Harder has built a handsome business now, with a lineup of celebrity clients including Lena Dunham, Roger Ailes and Hulk Hogan. Another client of Harder's firm, in addition to Melania Trump, is her son Barron Trump, who, according to a statement released by Harder, does not have autism. “This law firm represents First Lady–elect Melania Trump and her 10-year-old son, Barron Trump. A video was posted at YouTube recently speculating that Barron might be autistic. He is not.”
http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/melania-trump-threatens-lawsuit-over-barron-autism-video-w452617
Freder Frederson said... [hush][hide comment]
Hillary and Michelle use the platform but keep a ladylike hush over their hustle.
I'm sorry, making a claim about something is not the same as it being true. Please provide some examples where either Hillary or Michelle (or any other First Lady for that matter) used their position to personally enrich themselves.
Channeling Alan Colmes. Next, nitpicking any examples.
Freder -- You're right that I jumped the gun on Michelle. Her hustle has yet to manifest. Rumors that she would be hosting an Oprah-style daytime tv show are unsubstantiated.
As to Hillary ... dude.
How did the Trumps win the lawsuit against the Maryland Blogger? (yes, I know it was settled, so possibly just a question of resources).
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2017/02/melania-trump-settles-libel-suit-against-maryland-blogger-234730
Isn't it within a citizen's rights to publish something that they've sourced about a public figure? Anyone have any idea about this suit?
If I put on my tinfoil hat I could see how the Trumps might even pay this Maryland blogger to settle and make that apology, to scare others from saying the same thing.
If New York Times reporters are saying it in conversation, is it not now commonly sourceable?
She is neither elected nor appointed nor an employee of the government, where a conflict of interest could cause disenfranchisement of the People and our Posterity.
Where is Feminism when it is needed?
The female chauvinists are standing guard at the abortion chambers to ensure that no life unworthy will escape to report the victims of political progress.
Can you alphabetize your garnered tags? I went through the list several times but kept getting stopped at orgasm...
Did she take it out or the senior law partner?
Post a Comment