Mark Zuckerberg has agreed to settle a vacuous lawsuit that Donald Trump filed against Meta years ago. Why now? Here's all you need to know:
Toward the end of the November dinner, Trump raised the matter of the lawsuit, the people said. The president signaled that the litigation had to be resolved before Zuckerberg could be “brought into the tent,” one of the people said.
A lovely post-election dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Maybe some relaxing chat afterward about Greenland and the Panama Canal. Then the ask: Trump "signaled" that the lawsuit had to be "resolved" before Zuckerberg could be "brought into the tent."
This is just straight-up extortion except that there's probably no proof and Trump, as always, chose the wording of his threats carefully. But the meaning was crystal clear and Zuckerberg jumped at the opportunity. What choice did he have?
When you're president, you can't commit extortion.
Ridiculously and sadly, the Supreme Court has basically said this. But that doesn't mean the rest of us have to agree.
This was technically before Trump was sworn in and all the big tech moguls were streaming into Mar-A-Lago to bend the knee and let him know they would be happy to obey in advance.
If Kamala Harris had done this, of course, it would have been the end of the world.
That's not what the Supreme Court said. They said that the president cannot be prosecuted for any act undertaken as part of performing his official duties.
Maybe this Supreme Court would somehow construct a rationale for why threatening Mark Zuckerberg is a part of Trump's official duties, but that's speculation. In order to do that, they'd have to torture logic all over again. As the decision is written, however, this remains prosecutable.
Of course, the Department of Justice under Trump's authority will not prosecute him on this. Even if they might under other circumstances, this runs afoul of DOJ policy not to indict the president or vice-president while they are in office. And the chances that the Florida attorney general would investigate under state law is also zero.
So if I get banned from Facebook and I sue Meta l can settle for $25 million too! Sweet! What do I have to do to get banned?
Precisely what you voted for, conservatives.
Why would you think that conservatives view this as anything other than a win?
Trump must be kicking himself for his lack of ambition the first time around. A lousy $200,000 for access at Mar-a-Lago? Nickel-and-diming taxpayers putting aides up at his resorts? A measly few hundred thousand every now and then from guests at the DC hotel? How quaint it must all seem now.
The stars just weren’t aligned to begin that swamp cleaning we were promised. Maybe next week?
That was the old DEI infested swap, which they are clearing to make way for the new billionaires only swamp (you should see the HOA rules).
What choice did he have? Maybe . . . not entering the tent? Not exchanging his dignity for even more obscene personal profit?
Amen!
Some strong "masculine energy" by Zuck here.
"I think blackmail is such an Ugly word. Let's just call it a vicious threat." --- Lily 'Ernestine' Tomlin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMdHgQKpcXY
I fully expect the next Democrat in the WH to require a $10M minimum donation to their presidential library before Zuck (and all the other tech bros) can even speak to POTUS (D).
It was a perfect conversation, like the preect phone call with Zelenski
"... Trump, as always, chose the wording of his threats carefully."
What do the "Trump is a moron" party think about this kind of statement?
That you don't have to be smart to be cunning. He's had a lifetime of practice with the wealth to afford unscrupulous attorneys to help him along the way. I wouldn't doubt that his exact wording wasn't that sophisticated at all. Just barely enough to not be blatant and obvious.
I don’t use the Facebook so it’s not my fault. Social media is evil.
“Man met girl on Roblox app, coerced her to send photos, authorities say.
https://www.woodtv.com/news/michigan/man-met-girl-on-roblox-app-coerced-her-to-send-photos-authorities-say/
CNN. South Carolina Rep. Brandon Guffey was overwhelmed with rage when he first saw the man he believes caused his son’s suicide.
The suspect was extradited from Nigeria to the US over the weekend on charges that he targeted 17-year-old Gavin Guffey in a sexual extortion, or “sextortion” scheme, that led to the teen’s death.
Zuckerberg is one of the wealthiest people in the world. He has _lots_ of choices.
Yes. One would think that having that much of a wealth cushion could enable Zuck, or anyone, to be brave. But no. He wasn't willing to spend anything on "principles", since it doesn't seem to be anything he recognizes. Just $$$$$. And also $$$$$.
Enough money is never enough money.
This is all on the MSM. Both Trump and Zuckerberg knew this bribe would just be characterized as "settling a lawsuit" whereas in any other universe Meta's lawyers would be all over Trump with a SLAPP countersuit and it would have gone away.
It's also been enraging to see all the headlines about Trump's absolutely bonkers claim that the military somehow moved water from the PNW into California. In a normal world we'd be seeing "Is President Mentally Fit? Claims Army Creates Water" or "President Increasingly Unteathered From Reality in Wacko Social Media Post". But no. Instead we're treated to a "fact check" of Trump's post (spoiler alert: it's crazy) or headlines like "California Denies Trump Ordered Army to Deliver Water" and so it's just one blue state's word against the President's. We are so fucked.
+15.
Of course he did. Expect more if this. That or the news media will just not report anything even remotely critical of Trump. Either way the free press will pretty much cease to exist.
First ABC, now Suckerberg. Seems Trump has figured out an easier way to collect extortion fees. Just sue them no matter how poor or lacking of merits the lawsuit is, and then let the other party just settle to complete the transfer of money.
I think you're onto something there. ISTM that this method of extortion is also a better fit to his personality profile, the "Thank you sir may I have another" sort of un-nuanced sadism that Trump relishes.
Sump, a combo of t-Rump and suck, as in suck. When will these folks learn and develop spines. They can afford lawyers, just like Sump but then I forgot, no one, not even god can sue the village idiot.
I would describe that as "Zuckerberg bribes Trump" rather than "Trump extorts Zuckerberg".
That depends on how "staying out of the tent" is interpreted. For example, if it means "I will instruct the DOJ to produce some bogus charges against you and make sure you end up in jail", that is clearly extortion.
We don't actualy know how to interpret "staying out of the tent". For whatever that worth, Trump himself claimed that Zuckerberg was afraid he will be jailed.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-mark-zuckerberg-threats-meta-political-content-changes-2025-1
See also:
https://www.news.com.au/world/meta-boss-mark-zuckerberg-fears-he-will-be-jailed-by-donald-trump-claims-leading-expert-citing-an-insider/news-story/806e846b43907b05c02042116c5f7357
To me it seems clear that the "brought into the tent" remark translates as "if this lawsuit is not settled on terms favorable to me, I will not listen to you; if it is settled, I will listen to you." Zuckerberg paid a $25 million bribe to gain access to the presidential ear.
+1
I'd love to see the tortured mental leap required to put Zuckerberg in jail for this.
You seem to have mis-read it.
The threat is to jail Zuckerberg if he does not do what Trump wants him to do. For that Trump doesn't needs mental leap, he just needs corrupted FBI and DOJ.
Apropos corrupted FBI:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/01/30/fbi-leadership-removed-kash-patel-trump/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=wp_homepage
I don't see how the "tent" remark can be interpreted as a threat of criminal proceedings.
It's a very small and easy leap, but no Republican AG is going to take it.
Pingback: link love | Grumpy Rumblings (of the formerly untenured)