Stormy Daniels Sues the President

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meadmaker said:
There's something I don't get, and I haven't noticed it in this thread, and I haven't seen it in the three or four articles that I have read on this affair.

What is the basis of Stormy Daniels' lawsuit? I don't mean "why is she suing?" That would be in order to generate money and publicity, or perhaps she just doesn't like the Commander in Chief, or whatever. What harm is she alleging that Donald Trump did to her?

I have read that she says the NDA is invalid. Ok. I don't know or care, but that isn't the basis for a lawsuit. What is it that Donald Trump did (or is alleged to have done) that makes for a reason to sue? To have a suit, the plaintiff has to allege that a tort was committed, and that she is owed compensation. What was the (alleged) tort?

ETA: As for the fact that Donald Trump slept with a porn star while his wife was home taking care of their newborn son.......meh. It shows he's a sleazeball. We already knew that. As for the fact that he paid her hush money.......meh. No big deal. As for the fact that he is denying that he knew the hush money was paid......

:dl:

but it's no big deal.

The one thing that would change my mind that I can think of would be if he didn't use his own money to pay the hush money. If it came from his investors, or a charitable foundation, or campaign funds.........throw the book at him. That would be outrageous, but so far at least I'm assuming that it was his own money. If I'm wrong, and he actually stole the money for the hush money, then throw him out of office and into jail, but as long as it's his own money.....................meh.
Click to expand...

I love that the religious right wing nuts stick with him even as it is fully proven he is an adulterer, a seducer, a pedophile (Miss Teen thing), a clear urolagniac and no way in hell is he the slightest bit religious.
 
fuelair said:
I love that the religious right wing nuts stick with him even as it is fully proven he is an adulterer, a seducer, a pedophile (Miss Teen thing), a clear urolagniac and no way in hell is he the slightest bit religious.
Click to expand...

If he's an adulterer with porn stars and adult women, he can't be a pedophile, which is a strict medical term. But I'm trying to imagine in my head what would happen if Obama was caught doing those things. For the past couple days I've tried but can't. It's too horrific.
 
It's true that this doesn't get mentioned enough in the media: Daniels isn't suing Trump and doesn't want any money from him: all she wants to know is if the settlement is binding or not. If it is declared to be invalid, she might very well have to send back the 130K.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
It's true that this doesn't get mentioned enough in the media: Daniels isn't suing Trump and doesn't want any money from him: all she wants to know is if the settlement is binding or not. If it is declared to be invalid, she might very well have to send back the 130K.
Click to expand...

You can be sure she has deals lined up that pay that off for her.
 
fuelair said:
I love that the religious right wing nuts stick with him even as it is fully proven he is an adulterer, a seducer, a pedophile (Miss Teen thing), a clear urolagniac and no way in hell is he the slightest bit religious.
Click to expand...
Because they don't care. They know he's fallible and has done a myriad of things they consider immoral. And they don't care, as long as he's willing to give them what they want, ie. anti LGBTQ-legislation, tightening the noose on abortions, etc. etc.

Some of them even see him becoming President a part of God's plan, their argument being that noone as flawed as him should have a chance of winning an election. But he did, and so there must be some higher power behind him.
 
As has been mentioned in this thread it is a campaign finance law violation. Money spent for the purposes of a candidate's advancement must be declared. This payment clearly was (due to it's timing) for the advancement of the candidate, and it was certainly not declared.
 
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...

Maybe but possibly not as the deal had conditions for trump to fulfil to and as no one signed for him she has not gotten everything that she was supposed to as part of the deal.
 
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?
Click to expand...

Are we talking today or a few years ago? Once Trump was revealed as the second coming they decided that personal morality no longer mattered in elected leaders.
 
xjx388 said:
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!
Click to expand...

Just like lying about meeting russian ambassadors under oath is cool too. Oaths really don't mean anything anymore.
 
d4m10n said:
None; it is a suit for declaratory relief.
Click to expand...


So, the whole point of the suit is to get a judgement on whether or not the NDA is binding? That's fascinating, because of course the very act of filing the suit makes a non-disclosure agreement irrelevant for all practical purposes. She just disclosed everything she promised not to disclose. What would happen next? If the judge rules against her, the judge is basically saying, "Plaintiff is ordered not to tell anyone that Defendant Donald J. Trump (AKA Dennis Dennison) carried on a sleazy affair with a porn star and paid hush money to keep it silent.......but since the agreement is still valid, you can keep the hush money. Just don't tell anyone about it."

If the judge rules in her favor, i.e. that the NDA is invalid, wouldn't she have to give back the money?

But of course, at this point she doesn't care about that measly 130,000 dollars. One way or another, she has decided that going public was worth a lot more to her than staying silent.
 
Meadmaker said:
So, the whole point of the suit is to get a judgement on whether or not the NDA is binding? That's fascinating, because of course the very act of filing the suit makes a non-disclosure agreement irrelevant for all practical purposes. She just disclosed everything she promised not to disclose. What would happen next? If the judge rules against her, the judge is basically saying, "Plaintiff is ordered not to tell anyone that Defendant Donald J. Trump (AKA Dennis Dennison) carried on a sleazy affair with a porn star and paid hush money to keep it silent.......but since the agreement is still valid, you can keep the hush money. Just don't tell anyone about it."

If the judge rules in her favor, i.e. that the NDA is invalid, wouldn't she have to give back the money?
Click to expand...

Most likely yes
 
It's not a NDA, it's a settlement of 130K in return for not revealing juicy material and stories.
Since Daniels never worked for Trump, a NDA would be automatically null and void.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
It's not a NDA, it's a settlement of 130K in return for not revealing juicy material and stories.
Click to expand...

No it is more than that, there was an analysis on this linked to a while back that showed more of what it was, but it did obligate DD to certain actions as well. Of course his not signing it makes the whole thing questionable.
 
xjx388 said:
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!
Click to expand...

Maybe, but out of your last 5 Presidents, the majority haven't done this. At least no one has come forward about extra-marital affairs for either Bush, or Obama with any accusations that held any water
 
Does anyone want to take Trump's side on this? Is her lack of discretion and seeking a judgement after she did get paid a bit of a backstab?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom