Perhaps this is where my understanding of what you
Posted on: December 2, 2019 at 12:25:05 CT
MIZ45 KC
Posts:
36580
Member For:
15.93 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
define as "property" is skewed. To me, he paid for a good/service. Would that not be his "property"? It's my understanding that FB would be under obligation to run his ads since they accepted payment (unless, of course, Trump violated a policy/term). This is where the hypothetical comes in - what if the ads were removed even though Trump didn't actually violate any part of the agreement/contract? Whose "property rights" are being violated?