Name:   phil - Subject:   Truth Twister Martini Date:   5/29/2018 1:39:00 PM

Name:   GoneFishin  -  Subject:   Truth Twister Martini Date:   5/29/2018 10:36:05 AM

"Your justification is rather amazing. The Clintons were bad so the Trump's can emulate them. Have some balls and eiher defend it or admit it looks shady."

New York times

Ms. Trump’s representatives have said that there is nothing improper about Ms. Trump’s trademarks and that they prevent individuals from profiting off her name.

Abigail Klem, president of the Ivanka Trump brand, said in a statement on Monday that the brand’s protection of trademarks was “in the normal course of business,” especially in countries where trademark infringement was rampant.

So she is protecting her names from trademark infringement - please englighten us to how that is unethical? Immoral? What is there to defend besides your opinion that "it looks shady" and with the microscope on the White House I am sure that anything unethical or cirminal will come to light and a speedy impeachment trial thanks to the Clinton congressional sycophants.

Now, please enlighten us to how bad the Clinton's really are.  In my first post I indicated that investigations will probably happen and if anything bad is there then charges can and should be brought.  I do not know what her patents/trademarks apply to.  You want to say i justified her behavior based on Clinton which I did not do. You voted for the psycho woman, so please oh provider of defense of your canidate - defend the Clintons, Clinton Crime Inc. and apparently now Obozo's domestic spying. 

Breath will not be held awaiting a mature, intelligent answer or deflection.