Trump & Team Violating Ethics Again - Attacking Corporations

[belleflop]

When do I get a piece of that ad revenue stream since I paid for that advertisement? I'll await my check in the mail!

[Eliseus]

A boycott does not require one criticize or oppose fiercely and publicly, it simply requires inaction on the part of individuals. Notice that both examples provided beneath the bits you quoted indicate an action on behalf of someone, that's the context you're missing.

And your third definition is the neutral tone for "attack", one that only makes sense when presented in context as "attack" is generally understood in the aggressive tone by default (as indicated by the opening lines for each definition).

That fourth quote is entirely irrelevant, because you're still misconstruing what an attack actually is and what is contained in that quote is not an attack.

You are now stating what something can or can't be, and not actually what it is. Sure, a boycott can be exactly what you mentioned. This one is not what you mentioned. An attack does not need to be physical, and can in the context you described, exactly what is happening, which I LITERALLY just quoted you. Stop trying to change definitions like you change history please.

[Edge-]

You are now stating what something can or can't be, and not actually what it is. Sure, a boycott can be exactly what you mentioned. This one is not what you mentioned. An attack does not need to be physical, which I LITERALLY just quoted you. Stop trying to change definitions like you change history please.

I'm aware it doesn't need to be physical, but you're still not establishing how a boycott (the lack of action) is an attack (which requires action).

[Eliseus]

I'm aware it doesn't need to be physical, but you're still not establishing how a boycott (the lack of action) is an attack (which requires action).

I added more than physical, sorry, meant to add more but got lost in train of thought. I'm not trying to establish what you keep trying to move a goal post to. I'm establishing this specific boycott. Stop derailing from that.

[cubby]

When a non partisan review board with a legal mandate rules it unethical I will happily be wrong. But dozens of liberal shills saying something Trump is doing is unethical, Yeh The right had lots of those guys saying the same shit about Obama.

Again, it's adorable that you just input your opinion ahead of facts and evidence. Please read up on something before commenting - you're approaching flaming at this point.

Just a hint: both sides of the fence are crying ethical violation. NO sitting President has ever done something like this before. He's endorsing a product and shitting on an american company.

[Eliseus]

Again, it's adorable that you just input your opinion ahead of facts and evidence. Please read up on something before commenting - you're approaching flaming at this point.

Just a hint: both sides of the fence are crying ethical violation. NO sitting President has ever done something like this before. He's endorsing a product and shitting on an american company.

So you don't count things like Obama endorsing Beyonce etc? It is only bad when Trump does it™.

[Edge-]

So you don't count things like Obama endorsing Beyonce etc? It is only bad when Trump does it™.

When did he officially and publicly endorse Beyonce?

[cubby]

So you don't count things like Obama endorsing Beyonce etc? It is only bad when Trump does it™.

Is Beyonce a product? Owned by Obama's family?

Do you even know what the fuck you're talking about at this point? Or is the kool-aid chugging gotten to such an extreme level that reality has actually left the building?

[Dr Assbandit]

So you don't count things like Obama endorsing Beyonce etc? It is only bad when Trump does it™.

I didn't know Beyonce was Obama's long lost daughter .

[finchna]

Complete click bait. It basically is just him saying that people are dropping Ivanka as a direct attack on Trump. Which is true. Places that had no problem before he was President. No ethics broken at all.

and if they've found that sales have tanked since the election for whatever reason, that they have better uses for the space than to try to sell underperforming merchandise, is that OK? the twitter in chief sure doesn't like being criticized or second-guessed, doing so to a company takes unfair advantage of his position, and is certainly on the way to, if not clearly, conflicts of interest. When other government employees continue such efforts, those who must abide by ethics rules should face disciplinary measures.

[IIamaKing]

Again, it's adorable that you just input your opinion ahead of facts and evidence. Please read up on something before commenting - you're approaching flaming at this point.

Just a hint: both sides of the fence are crying ethical violation. NO sitting President has ever done something like this before. He's endorsing a product and shitting on an american company.

Of course not, no sitting president ever had the business holding like Trump does. So when an official review by a non partisan broad with some sort of legal mandate, rules it unethical or otherwise, I will happily be wrong. Till such a time its a bunch of shills doing what shills do.

[Eliseus]

Is Beyonce a product? Owned by Obama's family?

Do you even know what the fuck you're talking about at this point? Or is the kool-aid chugging gotten to such an extreme level that reality has actually left the building?

Are you joking? Does bey once not have a product or is apparently not famous anymore? The kool-aid must be strong you got.

- - - Updated - - -

I didn't know Beyonce was Obama's long lost daughter .

Oh, so endorsement only applies to family.

[Noradin]

Didn't need them to read or not read to be right. Thanks for letting me win this one.

Win what?
All you did was deonstrating that you cannot understand what you quote.
Apparently you do not understand he difference between "a campain urging people to boycott" and "boycott".
If you read only about every sixth word and guess the meaning from that but at the same time post walls of text taken from a dictionary then you cannot expect us to take you seriously.

[Eliseus]

Win what?
All you did was deonstrating that you cannot understand what you quote.
Apparently you do not understand he difference between "a campain urging people to boycott" and "boycott".
If you read only about every sixth word and guess the meaning from that but at the same time post walls of text taken from a dictionary then you cannot expect us to take you seriously.

This is some of the worse grasping at straws I have ever seen on this forum to date. "the difference between a campaign urging people to boycott and boycott". Wtf are you even talking about. We were talking about attacks, and just like your mod friend, you don't seem to know what an attack is and apparently assume this can't happen in a boycott. I would requote definitions for you, but you already read them and then chose to be ignorant of the fact after that. Can only beat a dead horse so much.

[Dr Assbandit]

Oh, so endorsement only applies to family.

In this case it does.

Also there is endorsement and then there is sicking his rabid followers on a company by taking his juvenile tantrums to twitter and shaming the company. He knows full well that the moment he criticizes pretty much anyone ranging from average Joe factory worker to our federal judges that his alt-right army of internet trolls will go for blood.

I can't remember the last time our president acted so reprehensibly.

[Jakexe]

Trumpkins are fucking lost at this point, they'll defend him because he's trump. He can do anything, they'll defend it.

It's just pathetic now. All those claims that hilary is bad coz she's corrupt ring so hollow. They never cared about corruption, they just cared it could be used against their political opponent. The qualms of morals were just a talking point, they never cared about the ethics themselves.

[Dr Assbandit]

Trumpkins are fucking lost at this point, they'll defend him because he's trump. He can do anything, they'll defend it.

It's just pathetic now. All those claims that hilary is bad coz she's corrupt ring so hollow. They never cared about corruption, they just cared it could be used against their political opponent. The qualms of morals were just a talking point, they never cared about the ethics themselves.

I'm just finding the whataboutisms hilarious considering Obama was just brought up for apparently "endorsing" Beyonce. It's to the point where they can't even differentiate between an endorsement and condemnation.

[Torgent]

Are you joking? Does bey once not have a product or is apparently not famous anymore? The kool-aid must be strong you got.

- - - Updated - - -



Oh, so endorsement only applies to family.

Well....if you knew how to read, yes. It applies to family and personal friends. Not "I enjoy Beyonce's music." OMGOMGOMGOMG But.........that was a big if, I guess.

[Dhrizzle]

What a shitty click bait title. Whats unethical about this statement? I mean the article you link doesn't even call it unethical.

The president of the United States of America is using his Twitter account and White House staff to berate a company for not supporting his daughter's clothing line. Read that sentence and think about how that might be unethical or abuse of his political position.

- - - Updated - - -

I like how the OP thinks that backing your own family is unethical.

I like how you think that an elected official using their position to further their family's business interests is ethical.

- - - Updated - - -

When a non partisan review board with a legal mandate rules it unethical I will happily be wrong. But dozens of liberal shills saying something Trump is doing is unethical, Yeh The right had lots of those guys saying the same shit about Obama.

Are you saying that George W. Bush's ethical advisor is a liberal shill?

- - - Updated - - -

Trumpkins are fucking lost at this point, they'll defend him because he's trump. He can do anything, they'll defend it.

It's just pathetic now. All those claims that hilary is bad coz she's corrupt ring so hollow. They never cared about corruption, they just cared it could be used against their political opponent. The qualms of morals were just a talking point, they never cared about the ethics themselves.

It's actually pretty amazing that in this case they haven't managed to pull out a "But Hillary..." statement in an attempt to deflect.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I do agree that the use of the Official twitter is wrong and yes I'd prefer the guy just stay of twitter but I dont think that will happen. I still will not agree that saying he thought the treatment of his daughter was "unfair" is some sort of attack.

His behavior has serious ramifications as the president. You're no longer a normal citizen when you're viewed as the most powerful person in the country, especially one who's prone to pursuing petty vendettas with any and all power he is able to use for them.