Leaked memo: Donald Trump volunteers banned from criticizing him, for life


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Would that be their first clue they’re backing the wrong horse?


#3

Yet another reason why anonymous speech is a good thing.

Enforceable or not, an encounter with a lawyer can be a soul and wallet scarring experience.


#4

Not even close, but they still won’t get it. It’s funny that Drumpf doesn’t like his followers telling it like it is.


#5

I don’t think this is going to bother anybody. Either these volunteers will rise to become the elite corps of a New World Order, or Trump goes down in flames and becomes a punch line. Either way, nobody gets sued.


#6

It’s not a contract if there is no compensation. That’s the reason one often sees the legal fiction of a payment of $1.00 for the sole purpose of providing compensation to create a contract.


#7

Only for life? What if some volunteer exploits this loophole to leave a posthumous diary disparaging Drumpf or his memory? The contract should be written to bind the volunteers’ heirs and successors for a thousand years or as long as the Drumpfreich lasts, whichever is longer.


#8

Oh great, now I want to become one of his volunteers if only so I can violate the hell out of this thing.


#9
"The agreement also forbids volunteers from working for another presidential candidate, should they change their minds."

Yeah, I’m sure that’ll stand the test of time.


#10

I’m pretty sure anyone stupid enough to volunteer for the Trump campaign is also not smart enough to realize how bad this is. They probably don’t read it, and in the unlikely event that they do, they probably figure that no one should be criticizing Great Leader Trump anyway, so it’s not a problem to make it (theoretically) a contract violation with civil penalties.


#11

Thank Xenu it’s not “life, plus a billion years” like in a Scientology contract.


#12

It seems shocking to us now, but once the President Trump Non-Disparagement Act of 2017 is signed into law with universal effect, it won’t seem like such a big deal any more.

And future citizens of Trumprica will probably wonder how previous generations could even think of disparaging the Eternal Orange Emperor.


#13

I suspect that The Drumpf has a great deal in common with L. Ron Hubbard.

(As a side note, spellcheck is still putting a red line under “Drumpf”. How long does it take to catch up with current usage?)


#14

$1 only counts as consideration if there’s some other identifiable (if perhaps intangible) benefit.

If you promised The Donald never to speak ill of him or his family or his companies or his family’s companies ever again from now until the end of time, and he gave you $1 to seal the deal, he wouldn’t have much chance in court if you reneged. But if he’d done some other, non-monetary favor for you in the bargain (used his influence to get you the prestigious commencement address at Trump University) he’d have a stronger case.

Normally I’d say this was stupid of him to do, because any other political candidate’s potential volunteers would be outraged by it, and no other campaign could enforce it because the political damage of doing so would be infinitely bad. But Trump knows his audience. Most Trumpenvolk who even bothered reading this would respond to the authoritarian “fuck you, buddy!” vibe it gives off, and would cheerfully turn on any apostate if the campaign wanted them to.


#15

But unlike this agreement, indentures are time limited…


#16

Hoo-rah for that kicker last sentence!


#17

OMG that’s funny, I think you just created a new meme! :stuck_out_tongue:


#18

Like this pic does?


#19

A: “How’s the work for the Trump campaign going?”

B: “I can’t complain.”


#20

Anonymous speech isn’t free speech. Just saying…