No other former US president’s genitals have been as widely reported and discussed (even participated in them) as Donald Trump’s. Now there is even a lawsuit over the entrepreneur’s best part. The point is whether an activist can register ‘Trump Too Small’ in the trademark register.
More is known about Trump’s penis than most people want to know. A few years ago, porn actress Stormy Daniels released many details after an alleged affair with the now 77-year-old became public. In her book Full Disclosure, she explained that his genitals “looked like the mushroom character from Mario Kart.” It’s also “smaller than average” but “not freaky small.” She couldn’t give the sexual act itself a good rating: “It was perhaps the least impressive sex I’ve ever had.”
Trump: “I guarantee you there is no problem”
Trump did not want to accept this and claimed that he was “very well equipped”. His hands should serve as proof. “Look at these hands, are they little hands?” he asked in an interview, holding up these pieces of evidence. “If they are small, something else must be small. I guarantee you there won’t be a problem. I guarantee it,” he argued.
It’s about Trump’s little involvement in political issues
The debate about the size of the legacy of the once most powerful man in the world has now been taken over by political activist Steve Elster, who wants to point out Trump’s mistakes. He also had ambiguous T-shirts made with the slogan ‘Trump Too Small’ – the back of the garment ultimately shows that this is about the Republican’s commitment to the environment, civil rights, immigrant and LGBTQ rights and an affordable healthcare system that is perceived as too small.
The lawsuit, which was heard at the Supreme Court on Wednesday, concerns the question of whether the slogan ‘Trump Too Small’ can be registered in the trademark register. The trademark office had rejected Elster’s application on the grounds that the slogan would be associated with the ex-president – therefore Trump’s approval was required. The activist, on the other hand, argued that his right to freedom of expression was violated because he criticized a public figure.
It appears that the Supreme Court will reject the application and the slogan will not be allowed to be registered as a trademark. Justice Neil Gorsuch pointed out that banning trademarks that refer to living people has a long tradition in American history. He indicated that he saw no problem with freedom of expression.
Source: Krone
I am Wallace Jones, an experienced journalist. I specialize in writing for the world section of Today Times Live. With over a decade of experience, I have developed an eye for detail when it comes to reporting on local and global stories. My passion lies in uncovering the truth through my investigative skills and creating thought-provoking content that resonates with readers worldwide.
