Those Viral Trump Supporting Singing, Dancing 'Freedom Kids' Now Plan To Sue Trump Campaign

from the how-these-things-always-end dept

Remember the little girls singing a song for Trump called the USA Freedom Kids? We wrote about it earlier this year after the performance was taken down due to a copyright dispute (of course). The video of the song went viral for a week or two and then died out:
Now, the Washington Post is reporting that the group is preparing to sue the Trump campaign and are no longer sure they support him as a Presidential candidate. The details are a little confusing and no actual lawsuit has been filed, so perhaps take this with a large grain of salt. Jeff Popick, who wrote the song, and is the father of the little girl in front, is claiming that the campaign violated the agreement it had with the group. Except, it wasn't a written agreement, just a verbal one:
"This is not a billion-dollar lawsuit," Popick said. "I'm doing this because I think they have to do the right thing. And if this means having to go through the court system to enforce them doing the right thing, then that's what I have to do. I'm not looking to do battle with the Trump campaign, but I have to show my girls that this is the right thing."
Now, to be clear, a verbal agreement is just as binding under the law as a written down contract, but it's still a lot harder to enforce, because you can't point back to the actual wording of the agreement and people can obviously dispute what was actually agreed upon. In this case, the handshake agreement itself seems fairly fuzzy -- and seems to involve Popick arguing that because the campaign changed its mind on a Freedom Kids performance, it now owes them... something, including a potential performance at the RNC convention (which obviously did not happen):
When Popick first reached out to the Trump campaign about performing, he spoke with various people including former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. His understanding from the campaign was that the Kids would make two appearances in Florida, where Popick lives. The first event didn't come to fruition, and Popick says he asked for $2,500 in payment for the second performance, in Pensacola. The campaign made a counter-offer: How about a table where the group could presell albums? Popick took the deal.

When they arrived at the venue, though, there was no table, Popick says. The result was "complete chaos," he said. "They clearly had made no provisions for that."
The campaign offered another performance, and Popick and the girls flew to that event, but upon landing were told that plans had changed.
It wasn't to be. When the plane landed, Popick had a message from the campaign staffer indicating that there was a change of plan. The campaign invited the performers to attend the rally, which they did, in their outfits. The campaign asked Popick not to talk to the media, he says, but then gave them seats within arm's length of the press. "They just were constantly coming over, wanting pictures," Popick said of the news media. "They wanted to take pictures, they wanted to ask questions — and I had to be a real jerk." The cost of the flights, rental car and hotel were all absorbed by Popick.

After that, he kept reaching out "again and again and again and again," without luck. He was passed around between staffers; calls went unreturned even after calls were promised. Emails Popick sent to the campaign (which he shared with The Post) detail the interaction between himself and the campaign and his ultimate request. "We are now asking and DEMANDING for what has been promised to us and is now long-overdue (and has been rightly earned by us); that is, a performance at the convention," an email dated July 9 reads. "Or, be made whole."
The fact that no lawsuit has yet been filed suggests that going public first is the latest method by which Popick is hoping to get paid by the campaign. Unless there are more details here, I'm not sure how much success Popick is likely to have with a lawsuit. It seems like a stretch from a legal angle. Without a written agreement, and with any verbal agreement sounding fuzzy at best, with Popick adding his own after-the-fact requirements for alternative compensation, I doubt any legal dispute stands much of a chance. Of course, it still doesn't look good for the Trump campaign, which had a (somewhat ridiculous) viral sensation in their camp and appears to have squandered it:
"At this point, my position is that I have no position, really," Popick said. "What he's done to my group or what he's not done for my group doesn't necessarily make him the best candidate, it doesn't make him the worst candidate. I still have to mull that over. He might still be the best candidate as president of the United States — or not."

"What I think I've learned," Popick added, "is that I'm not qualified to be a political commentator."
Of course, as the Washington Post article notes, Trump has a fairly long history of screwing over small businesses that he hires and then refuses to pay. So perhaps this is just the latest in a long line.

Filed Under: donald trump, jeff popick, lawsuit, trump campaign, usa freedom kids, viral videos


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Mason Wheeler (profile), 26 Jul 2016 @ 11:53am

    "What I think I've learned," Popick added, "is that I'm not qualified to be a political commentator."

    Well, neither are most of the people who do it for a living, so you're in good company, Mr. Popick.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Richard (profile), 26 Jul 2016 @ 12:41pm

      Re:

      Reminds me of David Penhaligon - sometime leading light in the British Liberal Party:

      After an opinion poll that suggested his party might actually win the next election he was quizzed by a BBC interviewer who said: "If an election happened now then you would become Chancellor - that's ridiculous isn't it? (Penhaligon was known as something of a jokey character). His reply was along the following lines: " Well when I consider the great responsibilities of the chancellor I do think 'who am I to take on such a task?' but then I go down to the House of Commons and see the man who is doing the job now (Nigel Lawson at the time) and all my doubts vanish!"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chris-Mouse (profile), 27 Jul 2016 @ 7:46am

      Re:

      Well, neither are most of the people who do it for a living, so you're in good company, Mr. Popick

      That's only true if accuracy is a requierment for being a political commentator. From what I can tell, the main qualification required to be a commentator is the ability to spout off line after line of pure BS and still keep a straight face. Looking at the news today, I'd say there are a lot of VERY qualified political commentators out there.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    DannyB (profile), 26 Jul 2016 @ 12:13pm

    Shocking!

    I'm sure we're all just as shocked as Mr. Popick is that the Trump campaign would agree to something, and then not honor that agreement. Even if it was just a verbal agreement. The fact that the Trump political campaign would not keep it's word is just shocking. Unbelievable.

    Or not.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 26 Jul 2016 @ 12:26pm

    When you lie down with dogs....

    When you lie down with dogs you MAY get fleas and when you play with alligators you will at least get bitten.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Groaker (profile), 26 Jul 2016 @ 12:36pm

    Trump could only entreat three children who were naive enough to support him?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Vidiot (profile), 26 Jul 2016 @ 12:41pm

    "... the Kids would make two appearances in Florida, where Popick lives..."

    Florida! What a surprise.

    /s/

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Oblate (profile), 26 Jul 2016 @ 12:47pm

    Maybe he thought they were immigrants?

    Trump! Making screwing over little girls and other supporters GREAT again!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 26 Jul 2016 @ 1:54pm

    Give me some money!

    Based on what I just read I get the impression that this guy wants to get some money and/or promote ( in hopes of getting some more money ) his song and the girls performing it.

    Without hearing the other side's story its hard to say what was negotiated but I am thinking it is likely something along the lines of "Sure, if you get here on your own we will let them perform but we can't cover cost of travel"

    But because plans change, as they often do in campaigns, he is upset that his free publicity vanished thus preventing him from pulling in vast riches.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 26 Jul 2016 @ 4:58pm

      Re: Give me some money!

      Yeah, I'm sure it went down exactly as you say.
      I mean you have so much conjecture and imagination how could it have happened in any other way.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 26 Jul 2016 @ 6:40pm

    Yawn

    Nuff said

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    btr1701 (profile), 3 Aug 2016 @ 8:19am

    Statute of Frauds

    > Now, to be clear, a verbal agreement is just as binding under the law as a
    > written down contract

    That's not completely true. Under the Statute of Frauds, which has been incorporated into the Uniform Commercial Code, certain contracts *must* be in writing in order to be enforceable. Two examples: any contract for more than $500, and any contract involving the sale or transfer of real property.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    lucimar bontemps, 17 Jan 2017 @ 10:35am

    Every thing about the money..

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.