Stormy Daniels Sues the President

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Big Dog said:
well she alleges that Trump was plowing the fields in 2006 and the statute of limitations is 5 years, so.....
Click to expand...
The statute of limitations may or may not be relevant.

First of all, while his adultery may be passed the statute of limitations, the attempted cover up isn't. I'm not sure what the law says, but they may consider it illegal to cover up a crime even if the crime is too old to be prosecuted. (In which case people can just point and laugh at the defendant for wasting all that money for no reason).

Or they may consider the possibility that there are more recent cases of adultery that Trump could be guilty of, and they want to hide this one because it can be used to establish president/history.

Overall, I don't consider the adultery to be an important legal factor, and if it is, it is far less important than the issue of broken campaign finance laws. Its just nice to point at Trump and laugh.
 
The Big Dog said:
well, no for several reasons, not the least of which is that he allegedly shot the meat rocket into the sausage wallet in California and Nevada
Click to expand...
Which may or may not be relevant. The actual sex may have taken place in California/Nevada, but the fact that he and Melania lived in New York means that the "crime" may have ties to more than 1 jurisdiction.
 
The Big Dog said:
wow, that surprises me because Florida has much better tax laws.

That does not change my answer but it would change the analysis a bit
Click to expand...

But he is pretty clearly a NY resident, what with his kid going to school in NY and all. I doubt he spends enough time in FL to claim otherwise.

On your broader point: yes, the adultery thing is a red herring. The campaign finance law aspect is the real problem. And the ****** lawyering. I think both may tie back to the idea that he really didn't expect to win. But that is just a hunch.
 
Segnosaur said:
Which may or may not be relevant. The actual sex may have taken place in California/Nevada, but the fact that he and Melania lived in New York means that the "crime" may have ties to more than 1 jurisdiction.
Click to expand...

I can assure you just as God made little green apples that Donald Trump did not violate a Florida statute prohibiting lewd and lascivious conduct by Husker Duing Stomy Daniels in a hotel room in Lake Tahoe Nevada.
 
Dr. Keith said:
On your broader point: yes, the adultery thing is a red herring. The campaign finance law aspect is the real problem. And the ****** lawyering. I think both may tie back to the idea that he really didn't expect to win. But that is just a hunch.
Click to expand...
Let's not forget prostitution. There is no chance that their relationship was an "affair" in the sense of two people sharing genuine affection for each other. If they had sex, he paid her for it.
 
Babbylonian said:
Let's not forget prostitution. There is no chance that their relationship was an "affair" in the sense of two people sharing genuine affection for each other. If they had sex, he paid her for it.
Click to expand...

I'm not willing to presume her taste in men. But, even if that is more likely than not, does she do herself any favors by admitting as much?
 
Babbylonian said:
Let's not forget prostitution. There is no chance that their relationship was an "affair" in the sense of two people sharing genuine affection for each other. If they had sex, he paid her for it.
Click to expand...

She wanted to get on The Apprentice, she probably paid him.
 
Dr. Keith said:
But he is pretty clearly a NY resident, what with his kid going to school in NY and all. I doubt he spends enough time in FL to claim otherwise.

On your broader point: yes, the adultery thing is a red herring. The campaign finance law aspect is the real problem. And the ****** lawyering. I think both may tie back to the idea that he really didn't expect to win. But that is just a hunch.
Click to expand...

The campaign finance thing is better, but they could not even get a similar charge to stick on John Edwards, what chance do they have on getting Donald Trump who merely wanted to hide the fact he was taking the bald-headed gnome for a stroll in the Stormy forest from his wife and son?
 
Last edited:
Dr. Keith said:
I'm not willing to presume her taste in men. But, even if that is more likely than not, does she do herself any favors by admitting as much?
Click to expand...
I think that would depend on her criminal record (a first offense probably wouldn't be a big deal), the financial upside she might foresee if she is allowed to say whatever she wants (she might already have offers on the table), and, most importantly, the likelihood that a specific jurisdiction would decide to prosecute her for prostitution given that doing so would require them to either prosecute or decline to prosecute (either would be problematic) the sitting POTUS for the same crime.
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
The campaign finance thing is better, but they could not even get a similar charge to stick on John Edwards, what chance do they have on getting Donald Trump who merely wanted to hide the fact he was taking the bald-headed gnome for a stroll in the Stormy forest from his wife and son?
Click to expand...
First of all, keep in mind that John Edwards was not found "not guilty" on everything. A mistrial was declared on several counts, suggesting that the results may have been close.

Secondly, given the total number of screw-ups coming from the trump camp (failure to sign documents, claims that the lawyer paid out of pocket, etc.) its possible that Trump's legal team is less competent than Edwards'.

Lastly, Trump is likely seen as a far less sympathetic defendant. What with being a Nazi-loving pussy grabber and all.
 
Babbylonian said:
I think that would depend on her criminal record, the financial upside she might foresee if she is allowed to say whatever she wants, and, most importantly, the likelihood that a specific jurisdiction would decide to prosecute her for prostitution given that doing so would require them to either prosecute or decline to prosecute (either would be problematic) the sitting POTUS for the same crime.
Click to expand...

FELLAS! She allegedly was interested in crashing the custard truck with Donald so she could get on his TV show.

No prostitution involved.
 
The Big Dog said:
The campaign finance thing is better, but they could not even get a similar charge to stick on John Edwards, what chance do they have on getting Donald Trump who merely wanted to hide the fact he was taking the bald-headed gnome for a stroll in the Stormy forest from his wife and son?
Click to expand...

For one, I bit Edwards had better lawyers. This arrangement sounds like something Trump hatched and pushed on his lawyers, not something proposed by a good lawyer.

I do like your euphemism work. Keep it up. But, if it lasts more than 4 hours, call your doctor.
 
Last edited:
Segnosaur said:
First of all, keep in mind that John Edwards was not found "not guilty" on everything. A mistrial was declared on several counts, suggesting that the results may have been close.

Secondly, given the total number of screw-ups coming from the trump camp (failure to sign documents, claims that the lawyer paid out of pocket, etc.) its possible that Trump's legal team is less competent than Edwards'.

Lastly, Trump is likely seen as a far less sympathetic defendant. What with being a Nazi-loving pussy grabber and all.
Click to expand...

Less sympathetic than John *********** Edwards? Edwards had an extramarital affair and fathered a child while his wife was dying of cancer.
 
Dr. Keith said:
For one, I bit Edwards had better lawyers. This arrangement sounds like something Trump hatched and pushed on his lawyers, not something proposed by a good lawyer.

I do like your euphemism work. Keep it up. But, if last more than 4 hours, call your doctor.
Click to expand...

nah, the charge against Edwards was bs, and all Trump has to say is that he did it to keep the news from his wife, and he is sorry and and their relationship is much stronger and he has accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as his Savior.
 
Babbylonian said:
I think that would depend on her criminal record (a first offense probably wouldn't be a big deal), the financial upside she might foresee if she is allowed to say whatever she wants (she might already have offers on the table), and, most importantly, the likelihood that a specific jurisdiction would decide to prosecute her for prostitution given that doing so would require them to either prosecute or decline to prosecute (either would be problematic) the sitting POTUS for the same crime.
Click to expand...

I don't think she could be prosecuted. Past the the statute of limitations, I would assume. Just don't know that she would want to be known as a prostitute.

The Big Dog said:
FELLAS! She allegedly was interested in crashing the custard truck with Donald so she could get on his TV show.

No prostitution involved.
Click to expand...

That sounds plausible. Is it based on her filing or other statements from her?
 
The Big Dog said:
nah, the charge against Edwards was bs, and all Trump has to say is that he did it to keep the news from his wife, and he is sorry and and their relationship is much stronger and he has accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as his Savior.
Click to expand...

He won't ever do the highlighted. How does that figure into your math?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom