Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1092465 Posts in 72163 Topics- by 19436 Members - Latest Member: Pablo3A
Jump to:  
The Trombone ForumPractice BreakChit-ChatPurely Politics(Moderators: bhcordova, RedHotMama, BFW) Nothing burger becomes a something burger
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Nothing burger becomes a something burger  (Read 9268 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
robcat2075

*
Online Online

Location: Dallas, Texas
Joined: Apr 19, 2009
Posts: 6647

View Profile
« Reply #300 on: Jan 04, 2018, 09:54PM »

I was not previously familiar with the word "scabrous" until the NY Times employed it to describe the forthcoming Trump book, as in "Wolff’s scabrous book comes out on Friday..."  :D


Quote
There are lots of arresting details in the book. We learn that the administration holds special animus for what it calls “D.O.J. women,” or women who work in the Justice Department. Wolff writes that after the white supremacist mayhem in Charlottesville, Va., Trump privately rationalized “why someone would be a member of the K.K.K.” The book recounts that after the political purge in Saudi Arabia, Trump boasted that he and Kushner engineered a coup: “We’ve put our man on top!”

But most of all, the book confirms what is already widely understood — not just that Trump is entirely unfit for the presidency, but that everyone around him knows it...

Quote
According to Wolff, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Reince Priebus, the former chief of staff, called Trump an “idiot.” (So did the media mogul Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News, though he used an obscenity first.) Trump’s chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn, compares his boss’s intelligence to excrement. The national security adviser, H. R. McMaster, thinks he’s a “dope.” It has already been reported that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called Trump a “*****,” which he has pointedly refused to deny.




Logged

Robert Holmén

Hear me as I Play My Horn


Get your Popper, Dotzauer, or Kummer play-alongs!
Piano man
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Posts: 10036

View Profile
« Reply #301 on: Jan 05, 2018, 12:13AM »

So much for my NY res to stay off the TTF.

Please don't stick to that resolution!

Your point is well taken that part of a 'non-compete' agreement is to avoid competition, as with your Bob's Pizza example. But let's look at that on its merits. Is there an advantage to opening another 'Bob's' across the street? Probably not, because now you're doing the same thing as the other guy, which just gets into price pressure, which is worse than you think (I've seen that very situation with Japanese and Korean food, and it did no one any good--in the end, the usurper failed).

But let's say there's an advantage to starting a pizza place across the street, and an available storefront. The danger to the existent business isn't that one of their employees will move in there, it's that anyone will do it. Short of any confidential information, the insider has no advantage over the outsider. So the non-compete is really only valid as a form of confidentiality agreement, because any other purpose for it isn't valid--you can't protect yourself against all competition. The issue of calling it 'Bob's' is solved without a non-compete--you buy the license for the name which precludes Bob from using it. I also think non-competes are more enforceable with respect to selling a business than with respect to employment, because the consideration granted is greater.

I've never been involved with this in court, and have never signed either end of a non-compete, but I think in absence of proprietary information these things are routinely shot down as unreasonable in the US.

With regard to the third-party issue, I can see where in a commercial setting a court might punish a third party for involving themselves in the theft of company secrets. That's a very different situation from where the aggrieved party is not only a public person but an elected public official, and where the third party is a journalist. In the past, courts have declined to prosecute publications that illegally leaked classified information (while sometimes prosecuting the leakers). Simply suborning breach of a confidentiality agreement, especially one that's primarily political in purpose, seems like a much easier acquittal than that.

Please don't quit posting on TTF.
Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain
Baron von Bone
Fear is the Mind-Killer.

*
Offline Offline

Location: Athens, GA (USA)
Joined: Jul 16, 2002
Posts: 18661
"Reality Junkie"


View Profile
« Reply #302 on: Jan 05, 2018, 04:16AM »

So much for my NY res to stay off the TTF.

I'm with PM ... I suggest that you maybe replace that resolution with staying away from problem children on TTF rather than avoiding the whole thing.
 
The social climate does better with you posting in here ... except for the fact that too many give attention and thus more bandwidth to deplorable influences.
Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.
 
- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves.  - Richard Feynman
- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool.   - Confucius
B0B
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jun 27, 2008
Posts: 5766

View Profile
« Reply #303 on: Jan 05, 2018, 05:13AM »

In this case, I don't think the courts would have too much difficulty dealing with a third party if Bannon, in breach of his agreement with Trump, provided confidential information to the third party. In such circumstances, maybe Trump could get the third party in this case to disgorge the profits from use of the confidential info. I recall a saying from the Court of Equity that "for every wrong, there is a remedy" and I vaguely recall a Canadian case in which the Court transferred ownership of a gold mine from one party to another (no contractual relationship between the parties) where there was a breach of confidentiality.

Press freedom vs. commercial exploitation of confidential information obtained through a breach of a confidentiality agreement. I wouldn't venture an opinion as to how that might turn out.

If Robcat's twitter link is correct, then it seems even that would have no leg to stand on. If the interviews were conducted with top staff members inside the white house itself, and he has tapes of those conversations... What is that if not approval for the author to do exactly what the author did, with the people he did it with?

Trump tweeted NO ACCESS and NEVER TALKED TO the wolff guy, but even the white house press secretary admits that wolff was indeed in the white house and was indeed talking with top staff members: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-wont-release-visitor-logs-in-response-to-questions-about-author-michael-wolffs-access/article/2645007 Even said he interviewed the president for 5-7 minutes during a phone call. That sounds remarkably helpful per Trump and his staff to the author, with the big complaint being they just don't like the result. And well, if that was a major point, it should have been dealt with the author directly as a condition for the access. Something like requiring prior review of anything written about those conversations. Doesn't sounds like they had any such condition, or they wouldn't have had to issue the cease and desist as they did.
Logged
B0B
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jun 27, 2008
Posts: 5766

View Profile
« Reply #304 on: Jan 05, 2018, 07:09AM »

Other news seems to have come out today...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/04/us/politics/trump-sessions-russia-mcgahn.html

Quote
President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.

...

Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.

...

Mr. Trump then asked, “Where’s my Roy Cohn?” He was referring to his former personal lawyer and fixer, who had been Senator Joseph R. McCarthy’s top aide during the investigations into communist activity in the 1950s and died in 1986.
Quote
Among the other episodes, Mr. Trump described the Russia investigation as “fabricated and politically motivated” in a letter that he intended to send to the F.B.I. director at the time, James B. Comey, but that White House aides stopped him from sending. Mr. Mueller has also substantiated claims that Mr. Comey made in a series of memos describing troubling interactions with the president before he was fired in May.

The special counsel has received handwritten notes from Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, showing that Mr. Trump talked to Mr. Priebus about how he had called Mr. Comey to urge him to say publicly that he was not under investigation.
Logged
Ellrod

*
Offline Offline

Location: North
Joined: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 6475

View Profile
« Reply #305 on: Jan 05, 2018, 08:12AM »

If Trump says no access and never talked, then what is the basis for a Court order stopping publication? And if Trump wants it quashed, I (and how millions of others) want to read it.

Is 3 tvs and a big Mac "confidential info"? Or just "embarrassing information"?

I knew it was a big news day yesterday when I got home from work and my wife was excited and had CNN and MSNBC blaring away. It's a great time to be alive.
Logged
robcat2075

*
Online Online

Location: Dallas, Texas
Joined: Apr 19, 2009
Posts: 6647

View Profile
« Reply #306 on: Jan 05, 2018, 08:16AM »

Quote
Mr. Trump said he had expected his top law enforcement official to safeguard him the way he believed Robert F. Kennedy, as attorney general, had done for his brother John F. Kennedy and Eric H. Holder Jr. had for Barack Obama.

Well, at least someone thinks Eric Holder was effective as Attorney General.
Logged

Robert Holmén

Hear me as I Play My Horn


Get your Popper, Dotzauer, or Kummer play-alongs!
B0B
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jun 27, 2008
Posts: 5766

View Profile
« Reply #307 on: Jan 05, 2018, 09:23AM »

Also, apparently the Trump team doesn't even both to check with friends...

https://twitter.com/MichaelWolffNYC/status/948913902930354176
Logged
ddickerson

*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 21, 2009
Posts: 9815

View Profile
« Reply #308 on: Jan 05, 2018, 09:27AM »

This is appropriate for this thread because this Wolfe book is another nothing burger. LOL!
Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic Band
Energy City Big Band
Energy City Dixieland Band
River Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band
B0B
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jun 27, 2008
Posts: 5766

View Profile
« Reply #309 on: Jan 05, 2018, 09:36AM »

This is appropriate for this thread because this Wolfe book is another nothing burger. LOL!
Sure, trump's tweets said so, and we know he'd never lie!
Logged
Ellrod

*
Offline Offline

Location: North
Joined: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 6475

View Profile
« Reply #310 on: Jan 05, 2018, 10:10AM »

This is appropriate for this thread because this Wolfe book is another nothing burger. LOL!

Early candidate for most predictable comment of 2018.
Logged
Posaunus
*
Offline Offline

Location: California
Joined: Feb 20, 2014
Posts: 723

View Profile
« Reply #311 on: Jan 05, 2018, 10:21AM »

This is appropriate for this thread because this Wolfe book is another nothing burger. LOL!

Dusty,

I presume you can write this with authority because:
• You have purchased and read the "Wolfe (sic) book," and
• You have personal information to refute the book's apparent claims.

(Full disclosure: I have not purchased nor read the book, nor do I intend to.) 

Happy new year. 
Logged
robcat2075

*
Online Online

Location: Dallas, Texas
Joined: Apr 19, 2009
Posts: 6647

View Profile
« Reply #312 on: Jan 05, 2018, 10:35AM »

It seems likely that the quotes in the book were indeed spoken. They are not "nothing."

But, if people talking to Wolff (everyone in the White House apparently) shaded their comments to Wolff because they had some secret axe to grind against Trump and people around him... that would be a story in itself.

If any quotes in that book are actually false statements by the person speaking, that's not a promising indicator for the hiring decisions of  the Trump admin.

If the book is true, it's bad for Trump.
If the book is not true, it's bad for Trump.
Logged

Robert Holmén

Hear me as I Play My Horn


Get your Popper, Dotzauer, or Kummer play-alongs!
robcat2075

*
Online Online

Location: Dallas, Texas
Joined: Apr 19, 2009
Posts: 6647

View Profile
« Reply #313 on: Jan 05, 2018, 10:40AM »

Also, apparently the Trump team doesn't even both to check with friends...

https://twitter.com/MichaelWolffNYC/status/948913902930354176

That is especially funny.

Either no one in Trump's orbit checked the guy out or Wolff was able to get in anyway with some well-placed flattery of the one person whose opinion mattered, Trump.
Logged

Robert Holmén

Hear me as I Play My Horn


Get your Popper, Dotzauer, or Kummer play-alongs!
B0B
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Jun 27, 2008
Posts: 5766

View Profile
« Reply #314 on: Jan 05, 2018, 10:44AM »

Looks like there's new news per the russia collusion mess. Two senators issue the first recommendation for the DOJ to look into charges per the russian collusion investigation. The target? Christopher Steele, one of the authors of the dossier. Did I mention they were two REPUBLICAN senators? Charles E. Grassley and Lindsey Graham.

What did he do? Apparently they take issue with some of his communications to us news outlets. Specifically that he lied to federal authorities about his contacts with reporters regarding information in the dossier. Quite the roundabout.

Otherwise, they seem to cite a document that the DOJ and FBI already provided to them, without feeling it warranted charges.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/05/us/politics/christopher-steele-dossier-judiciary-committee.html

So much for the senate investigate going on as the professional and non-partisan investigation.

What they want him charged with? Violating this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

Odd, considering how the head of the DOJ has done just that to senators on multiple occasions over the past year, and they have no concern.
Logged
Piano man
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Posts: 10036

View Profile
« Reply #315 on: Jan 05, 2018, 11:04AM »

This is appropriate for this thread because this Wolfe book is another nothing burger. LOL!

Trump apparently doesn't think so.
Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain
Ellrod

*
Offline Offline

Location: North
Joined: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 6475

View Profile
« Reply #316 on: Jan 05, 2018, 11:19AM »

Looks like there's new news per the russia collusion mess. Two senators issue the first recommendation for the DOJ to look into charges per the russian collusion investigation. The target? Christopher Steele, one of the authors of the dossier. Did I mention they were two REPUBLICAN senators? Charles E. Grassley and Lindsey Graham.

What did he do? Apparently they take issue with some of his communications to us news outlets. Specifically that he lied to federal authorities about his contacts with reporters regarding information in the dossier. Quite the roundabout.

Otherwise, they seem to cite a document that the DOJ and FBI already provided to them, without feeling it warranted charges.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/05/us/politics/christopher-steele-dossier-judiciary-committee.html

So much for the senate investigate going on as the professional and non-partisan investigation.

What they want him charged with? Violating this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

Odd, considering how the head of the DOJ has done just that to senators on multiple occasions over the past year, and they have no concern.

Let's see. Christopher Steele, English ex-spy, resident of London, is retained to use his connections and contacts in Russia to compile a dossier of information on Trump's dealings in Russia. Initially he undertakes this work on behalf of a private citizen who although a Republican, is not a Trump fan. At some point, the Democrats acquire Mr. Steele's work product, and, eventually, the dossier is turned over to the FBI.

I am hard pressed to see any wrongdoing on the part of Mr. Steele in this matter. G and G's recommendations are, well, a nothingburger.
Logged
Russ White

*
Offline Offline

Location: Orange City, Fl
Joined: Feb 27, 2007
Posts: 5246

View Profile
« Reply #317 on: Jan 05, 2018, 11:26AM »

I will agree with Dusty on this one. There is nothing in this book, from what I've seen so far, that is anything that wasn't already known by anyone who has been paying attention and isn't intellectually compromised. That Drumpf is a middle school bully with the intellectual capacity and curiousity of a 5 year old? Known that for a while. THat it's gonna end up being about money laundering? THat too. THat Ivanka is "dumb as a brick"? Yep. Etc., etc., etc................

Truly a nothing burger.
Logged

Better than yesterday, better yet tomorrow.
Ellrod

*
Offline Offline

Location: North
Joined: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 6475

View Profile
« Reply #318 on: Jan 05, 2018, 12:31PM »

Moneyburger for Mr. Wolff.
Logged
Russ White

*
Offline Offline

Location: Orange City, Fl
Joined: Feb 27, 2007
Posts: 5246

View Profile
« Reply #319 on: Jan 05, 2018, 12:42PM »

Moneyburger for Mr. Wolff.

True Dat! The book jumped something like 40,000 places on the NYT best-seller list in a ouple of days.
Logged

Better than yesterday, better yet tomorrow.
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18   Go Up
Print
Jump to: