Stormy Daniels Sues the President

Status
Not open for further replies.
mgidm86 said:
Well Stormy Daniel's ranking on a porn site I checked out is in the top 5. I'd never heard of her before this, but I don't suppose I would have. I'd say it will work out very well for her. Why else would she reveal anything about an affair from years ago? Money.
Click to expand...
Money is probably the main reason. There may be other alternatives: disgust over what she sees as an incompetent hypocrite in power who might try to bring in some 1950s style repression. Some perceived slight she feels Trump gave her.

As for Trump, who do you think will care about any of this aside from the people who already hate him? A billionaire had an affair years ago with a porn star and possibly a lot of other women...shocker.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that it wasn't just the fact that it happened years ago. Its the fact that they tried to cover it up (and did so incompetently).

Granted, Trump's voter base is largely composed of bigots and hypocrites who are willing to give him a pass. But there may be a few who may see this as the final straw and finally quit supporting him. Death by a thousand paper cuts and all.
Of all the crap Trump has been accused of though, screwing a porn star years before he ran for President smells of desperation more than anything.
Click to expand...
Last time I checked, Trump and the republican party was the one that had been supported by most evangelical Christians. You know, the one that claims the moral high ground when it comes to issues like gay rights, censorship, and abortion. This issue is as much about highlighting their failings as it is to highlight Trump's.

Plus, Trump is a reprehensible person who has harmed (and plans to further harm) many people... DACA recipients, Obamacare users, LGBTers, minorities, etc.. There is certainly an element of Schadenfreude involved... We can't stop Trump from harming these groups, but we can certainly see him go through his own suffering.
 
Segnosaur said:
Money is probably the main reason. There may be other alternatives: disgust over what she sees as an incompetent hypocrite in power who might try to bring in some 1950s style repression. Some perceived slight she feels Trump gave her.


Keep in mind that it wasn't just the fact that it happened years ago. Its the fact that they tried to cover it up (and did so incompetently).

Granted, Trump's voter base is largely composed of bigots and hypocrites who are willing to give him a pass. But there may be a few who may see this as the final straw and finally quit supporting him. Death by a thousand paper cuts and all.

Last time I checked, Trump and the republican party was the one that had been supported by most evangelical Christians. You know, the one that claims the moral high ground when it comes to issues like gay rights, censorship, and abortion. This issue is as much about highlighting their failings as it is to highlight Trump's.

Plus, Trump is a reprehensible person who has harmed (and plans to further harm) many people... DACA recipients, Obamacare users, LGBTers, minorities, etc.. There is certainly an element of Schadenfreude involved... We can't stop Trump from harming these groups, but we can certainly see him go through his own suffering.
Click to expand...

11 years ago has a different connotation when you are 71.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
I agree that it was probably discussed with Trump.

However that doesn't mean Trump wasn't pissed at the specific way she answered, or that his anger would be rational.

And he can be pissed at her and not have her leave.
Click to expand...

I'm certain that if Trump gets mad at her for having to handle those questions, she will leave. :)
 
On the contract itself. As I understand Daniels is saying it's invalid because the contract wasn't signed by Trump. But can't it be considered a valid contract if all the terms of it were fulfilled -she got the money so she is still bound by the terms even if the contract wasn't technically complete? IANAL so if someone is and can clarify, that would be great.

Although, I think it's possible that her lawyer knows it might be held enforceable but knows that this little action will force Trump to respond and thus reveal that, yeah, he screwed Stormy Daniels.

Why anyone cares about this very much at all is another question I have . . .
 
xjx388 said:
On the contract itself. As I understand Daniels is saying it's invalid because the contract wasn't signed by Trump. But can't it be considered a valid contract if all the terms of it were fulfilled -she got the money so she is still bound by the terms even if the contract wasn't technically complete? IANAL so if someone is and can clarify, that would be great.

Although, I think it's possible that her lawyer knows it might be held enforceable but knows that this little action will force Trump to respond and thus reveal that, yeah, he screwed Stormy Daniels.

Why anyone cares about this very much at all is another question I have . . .
Click to expand...

Were you saying that about the Clinton/Lewinsky scandle?
 
xjx388 said:
On the contract itself. As I understand Daniels is saying it's invalid because the contract wasn't signed by Trump. But can't it be considered a valid contract if all the terms of it were fulfilled -she got the money so she is still bound by the terms even if the contract wasn't technically complete? IANAL so if someone is and can clarify, that would be great.

Although, I think it's possible that her lawyer knows it might be held enforceable but knows that this little action will force Trump to respond and thus reveal that, yeah, he screwed Stormy Daniels.

Why anyone cares about this very much at all is another question I have . . .
Click to expand...

<CT hat on>
http://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/pregnant-stormy-daniels-trump/8625/

While paying her off, Trump originally forced Daniels agree to keep quiet about a specific set of things that went beyond the mere fact that they were having sex. MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell managed to pick this passage out of Daniels’ court filings, which he presented on-air on Wednesday evening: “sexual partners, alleged sexual actions or alleged sexual conduct, related matters, or paternity information.” Unless Trump’s attorneys were so incredibly sloppy that they merely copy-pasted boilerplate language into the nondisclosure agreement that had nothing to do with the affair, this implies that Trump got Daniels pregnant.

</CT hat on>

The biggest problem with this theory is that Trump has the worst attorney so yeah, he probably was sloppy.

Trumps non-responses and non-suit against Daniels merit some discussion though. It is out of character for him.
 
xjx388 said:
On the contract itself. As I understand Daniels is saying it's invalid because the contract wasn't signed by Trump. But can't it be considered a valid contract if all the terms of it were fulfilled -she got the money so she is still bound by the terms even if the contract wasn't technically complete? IANAL so if someone is and can clarify, that would be great.
Click to expand...
The analysis provided earlier in the link to Seth Abramson's twitter feed points out that: Trump did not need to sign it for it to be considered a valid contract (as representatives sign contracts all the time). But there is another problem... because Trump's lawyer created a corporation for the purposes of making payments, it is unclear whether Cohen was acting as Trump's lawyer (in which case he could sign for Trump) or as the representative of this dummy corporation (in which case he didn't have the right to represent trump.)

And even if Trump should have signed it, the fact that money was exchanged could make the contract valid. On the other hand, its also possible for the judge to simply consider the payment an "ill-informed gift".

I suspect that much of this will come down to the whims of the judge who rules on the case.

Although, I think it's possible that her lawyer knows it might be held enforceable but knows that this little action will force Trump to respond and thus reveal that, yeah, he screwed Stormy Daniels.
Click to expand...
Or, Trump will not bother enforcing it because he (or his lawyers) realize that in order to enforce it he'd have to appear in court.
Why anyone cares about this very much at all is another question I have . . .
Click to expand...
I already gave some reasons:
- It is hoped that it is the straw that broke the camel's back that may cause at least some Trump supporters to abandon Cheeto Mussolini
- Even if it won't affect Trump's actions as racist-in-chief, people get a certain amount of satisfaction when misfortune happens to bad people. Kind of like that classic movie clip when hitler got hit in the groin with a football.
 
Well, finally we get to hear first hand accounts of the sex life of a man in his 60s. About 65 when he fathered his last child. It may not be easy to get excited about the old in out at that age, but with up to three women servicing him, he may have managed intercourse on a weekly basis.
 
Here's what I want to know:
Do the evangelical and GOP Trump supporters really think it's ok for a presidential candidate to pay hush money to cover up an affair?

I don't want to hear about Bill Clinton, or how they think I feel about it, I just want them to come out and say it: Yes, they think it is ok that Trump paid hush money to cover up an affair with a porn star. They just need to admit it.

Because, you know, if you ask me, I really don't care that he did it. I think it is funny. But growing up with people who are Trump supporters, I would find it amazing if they were to think it was funny.

This is just another example of something I've been saying all along: it's not about Trump. It's about the people who support him. For all the "evangelical christians" and "party of family values" crap we hear, to suddenly let it all go is the height of hypocrisy. I can say I didn't care about Clinton's affairs and I don't care about Trump. You might question my morals, but at least I am consistent. But for the GOP to turn a blind eye to this? Yeah, right.

Actually, it also shows consistency. They consistently have the standard, "If a democrat does it it's bad, but if a republican does it, no big deal"
 
dudalb said:
Were you saying that about the Clinton/Lewinsky scandle?
Click to expand...

I know I was.

I was saying something else about the Clinton perjury scandal, though.

ETA: But hey, if you want me to treat the Trump-Daniels thing the way you treated the Clinton-Lewinsky thing, I think we can reach a mutually satisfying arrangement.
 
Last edited:
pgwenthold said:
Here's what I want to know:
Do the evangelical and GOP Trump supporters really think it's ok for a presidential candidate to pay hush money to cover up an affair?

I don't want to hear about Bill Clinton, or how they think I feel about it, I just want them to come out and say it: Yes, they think it is ok that Trump paid hush money to cover up an affair with a porn star. They just need to admit it.

Because, you know, if you ask me, I really don't care that he did it. I think it is funny. But growing up with people who are Trump supporters, I would find it amazing if they were to think it was funny.

This is just another example of something I've been saying all along: it's not about Trump. It's about the people who support him. For all the "evangelical christians" and "party of family values" crap we hear, to suddenly let it all go is the height of hypocrisy. I can say I didn't care about Clinton's affairs and I don't care about Trump. You might question my morals, but at least I am consistent. But for the GOP to turn a blind eye to this? Yeah, right.

Actually, it also shows consistency. They consistently have the standard, "If a democrat does it it's bad, but if a republican does it, no big deal"
Click to expand...

Isn't the difference due to the nature of the offence?
Trump - prostitution
Clinton - rape
 
I didn't care about the Lewinsky affair and I don't care about the Stormy Daniels affair. This is what guys with power do, Dem, Repub, sinner and saint. I do feel bad for the crap the families have to go through because we just love scandal so much.

I do care a bit more about the campaign finance stuff it might bring up; paying hush money right before the election could be argued as being campaign expenses. I mean, it just shows how dumb Trump is about this stuff. I also think campaign finance issues should be taken pretty seriously.

I care much less about the Bill Clinton lying under oath issue because I think people should get a pass on lying about affairs under oath. Like, duh, he's not gonna admit that where his wife can hear it!
 
pgwenthold said:
Here's what I want to know:
Do the evangelical and GOP Trump supporters really think it's ok for a presidential candidate to pay hush money to cover up an affair?

I don't want to hear about Bill Clinton, or how they think I feel about it, I just want them to come out and say it: Yes, they think it is ok that Trump paid hush money to cover up an affair with a porn star. They just need to admit it.

Because, you know, if you ask me, I really don't care that he did it. I think it is funny. But growing up with people who are Trump supporters, I would find it amazing if they were to think it was funny.

This is just another example of something I've been saying all along: it's not about Trump. It's about the people who support him. For all the "evangelical christians" and "party of family values" crap we hear, to suddenly let it all go is the height of hypocrisy. I can say I didn't care about Clinton's affairs and I don't care about Trump. You might question my morals, but at least I am consistent. But for the GOP to turn a blind eye to this? Yeah, right.

Actually, it also shows consistency. They consistently have the standard, "If a democrat does it it's bad, but if a republican does it, no big deal"
Click to expand...

Yes,they do. The Evagelical Trump Supporters are giving us a display of hypocrisy the like of which we have not seen for a while.
 
xjx388 said:
I do care a bit more about the campaign finance stuff it might bring up; paying hush money right before the election could be argued as being campaign expenses. I mean, it just shows how dumb Trump is about this stuff. I also think campaign finance issues should be taken pretty seriously.
Click to expand...
There is a theory out there that says he did not really think that he would win the election. If he had lost then none of this would make any difference and we might not even know about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom