Stormy Daniels Sues the President

[The Big Dog]

A fine example of slut shaming.

No just another euphemism for the beast with two backs.

Golly the porn star does not get so grumpy when people refer to her in much, much more negative ways on twitter.

But I get that lots of people really admire her, for seducing a married man and new father, and then taking 130k to keep her dalliance a secret before the election.

She got paid! And gave a Dondi Eyeball tour de force performance on Chatting with the Porn Stars, err, 60 Minutes

 

[acbytesla]

Most of the time a great lawyer is still bound by the law.

I agree. But there are nuances of the law as well as thorny details.

And the question for this thread is does Aveanatti who graduated first in his class from Columbia University know the law better than the Big Dog. I'm the first person to admit, I don't know with certainty who is better. But my bet it is the person who graduated top of his class form an Ivy League University than some anonymous guy on ISF.

But hey, that's just me.

 

[The Big Dog]

I agree. But there are nuances of the law as well as thorny details.

And the question for this thread is does Aveanatti who graduated first in his class from Columbia University know the law better than the Big Dog. I'm the first person to admit, I don't know with certainty who is better. But my bet it is the person who graduated top of his class form an Ivy League University than some anonymous guy on ISF.

But hey, that's just me.

who said he didn't know the law, what he is doing here however is advocating on behalf of his client, which means that he is taking positions that he thinks benefit his client that may not be the according to Hoyle interpretation of the law.

I on the other hand am basically taking a neutral scholarly approach for the benefit of the gentle readers of this thread.

 

[acbytesla]

who said he didn't know the law, what he is doing here however is advocating on behalf of his client, which means that he is taking positions that he thinks benefit his client that may not be the according to Hoyle interpretation of the law.

I on the other hand am basically taking a neutral scholarly approach for the benefit of the gentle readers of this thread.

You think? Ever hear the 'awe shucks, I'm just a country lawyer' line? This guy ain't no country bumpkin, I don't care How he plays it for the cameras.

I think you're a smart guy. You're arguments make sense. That said, I don't think you're a lawyer.

I think, Avenatti is both.

 

[mgidm86]

A fine example of slut shaming.
Far as I'm concerned, what happened seems to be a consensual sexual encounter. Why do you continue to disparage the woman? Yes, she's a porn star. So what?
Suppose that he had "ridden" a socialite and "put her away wet" (whatever that means). Would that be any more scandalous? In either case, his wife had recently given birth and he was dallying on the side, and it matters not one whit whether the person he dallied with was paid for pornography or was otherwise "respectable".

Far as I'm concerned, the dalliance doesn't matter much, though it certainly points to a kind of hypocrisy on the part of the "character matters" contingent of the religious right, who seem mighty willing to forgive their guy, but not those on the other side. Still, that said, Trump won't suffer much political loss from this issue -- unless the payoff ends up being a legal issue regarding use of campaign funds or an illegal campaign contribution.

The end result is this: the Republicans are losing their claim that character matters to them. It doesn't, if the character in question supports their policies. That's too bad, not only for the Republican party, but for our nation as a whole. All of us ought to care about character (yes, that includes the Democrats who ignored the issues surrounding Clinton).

Anyway, he's your guy (after Bernie, right?) and so no prob.

I didn't see any mention that she was a porn star in the highlighted post you responded to. She knowingly screwed a married man for gain and is now talking about it publicly. If anyone were slut-shaming her though I think it would be deserved. Disparaging the woman? Haha come on, she deserves all she gets.

Anyways, move over Stormy, Roseanne is back in town.

 

[varwoche]

No just another euphemism for the beast with two backs.

Golly the porn star does not get so grumpy when people refer to her in much, much more negative ways on twitter.

But I get that lots of people really admire her, for seducing a married man and new father, and then taking 130k to keep her dalliance a secret before the election.

She got paid! And gave a Dondi Eyeball tour de force performance on Chatting with the Porn Stars, err, 60 Minutes

Hilarious! Poor Donald, ever the victim.

 

[johnny karate]

I didn't see any mention that she was a porn star in the highlighted post you responded to. She knowingly screwed a married man for gain and is now talking about it publicly. If anyone were slut-shaming her though I think it would be deserved. Disparaging the woman? Haha come on, she deserves all she gets.

Don’t forget to throw in a mild criticism of Trump to maintain the charade that you’re not defending him.

 

[blutoski]

Don’t forget to throw in a mild criticism of Trump to maintain the charade that you’re not defending him.

And I always like to circle it back to reviewing what, exactly, are the important elements of this storyline in the Trump Show.

From what I see, it's the payoff. I don't think the 'discovery' that Trump had an affair while his wife was postpartum will be an issue to his supporters. At this moment, I'm sure most voters leaning republican take it for granted that it's true.

It's not much leverage for Democrats, because we're 20 years post Clinton's Oval Office tonsil tickling, and there's still a critical mass of Dem congresscritters who were there and insisted a president's monkey business is not the nation's business.

So, it might come down to illegal campaign funding, which is a genuine crime, but again, it's kinda technical and I'm not sure Republicans will care.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

A fine example of slut shaming...

Suppose that he had "ridden" a socialite and "put her away wet" (whatever that means)...

Originally offered as how not to treat a horse after returning from a strenuous ride.

Wiktionary: “From the inadvisable practice of riding a horse, and then stabling it while it is still coated in sweat, rather than brushing and grooming it properly afterwards.”

It’s evolved to become a more general-use euphemistic phrase for mistreatment of anything or anyone.

 

[acbytesla]

I didn't see any mention that she was a porn star in the highlighted post you responded to. She knowingly screwed a married man for gain and is now talking about it publicly. If anyone were slut-shaming her though I think it would be deserved. Disparaging the woman? Haha come on, she deserves all she gets.

Anyways, move over Stormy, Roseanne is back in town.

Don’t forget to throw in a mild criticism of Trump to maintain the charade that you’re not defending him.

I think this case is hilarious. The same people who trashed Bill Clinton at every opportunity for his indiscretions don't care at all that their GOP President is about as sleazy as they come. Now, Stormy Daniels is no saint, but she isn't representing the nation.

For me, this comes down to the public's right to know the candidates and that those candidates cannot buy secrecy. And by the judge voiding this type of contract, he sends a signal to those running for office, they can't depend on NDAs protecting their dirty secrets.

 

[phiwum]

I didn't see any mention that she was a porn star in the highlighted post you responded to. She knowingly screwed a married man for gain and is now talking about it publicly. If anyone were slut-shaming her though I think it would be deserved. Disparaging the woman? Haha come on, she deserves all she gets.

Anyways, move over Stormy, Roseanne is back in town.

TBD has previously mentioned movie titles. The fact she's a porn star certainly influenced the post I quoted.

As far as what she deserves, her vocation had nothing to do with it. I personally tend to blame the married party more than the unencumbered one, as a rule.

 

[phiwum]

And I always like to circle it back to reviewing what, exactly, are the important elements of this storyline in the Trump Show.

From what I see, it's the payoff. I don't think the 'discovery' that Trump had an affair while his wife was postpartum will be an issue to his supporters. At this moment, I'm sure most voters leaning republican take it for granted that it's true.

It's not much leverage for Democrats, because we're 20 years post Clinton's Oval Office tonsil tickling, and there's still a critical mass of Dem congresscritters who were there and insisted a president's monkey business is not the nation's business.

So, it might come down to illegal campaign funding, which is a genuine crime, but again, it's kinda technical and I'm not sure Republicans will care.

Right. If there's anything significant here, aside from the hypocrisy of the evangelical "character matters" wing, it will surely be the payoff.

And even that might amount to nothing. We'll have to see.

Mostly this is a minor story for this presidency, though a major scandal in other times.

 

[logger]

A fine example of slut shaming.

This is fascinating, I wish the left would make up his mind. This woman clearly is a slut In every sense. She clearly sells herself for sex and is proud of it. The reason why this lifestyle isn’t to be celebrated because degrades women in the worst of ways. Even Cosmo has decided to take its magazines off the shelves in the checkout line. Why? Because they don’t want men to get the wrong picture of women.

 

[logger]

I agree. But there are nuances of the law as well as thorny details.

And the question for this thread is does Aveanatti who graduated first in his class from Columbia University know the law better than the Big Dog. I'm the first person to admit, I don't know with certainty who is better. But my bet it is the person who graduated top of his class form an Ivy League University than some anonymous guy on ISF.

But hey, that's just me.

The stormy details aren’t as complicated as you might think. TBD has done a great job showing that.

 

[acbytesla]

The stormy details aren’t as complicated as you might think. TBD has done a great job showing that.

He has done a good job showing us his limited knowledge? But does he understand those nuances and thorny details?

 

[Craig4]

This one doesn't seem to be going away or going in The Hair's favor.

 

[acbytesla]

This is fascinating, I wish the left would make up his mind. This woman clearly is a slut In every sense. She clearly sells herself for sex and is proud of it. The reason why this lifestyle isn’t to be celebrated because degrades women in the worst of ways. Even Cosmo has decided to take its magazines off the shelves in the checkout line. Why? Because they don’t want men to get the wrong picture of women.

Why is it that when a woman is promiscuous, you call her a slut, but if a man is promiscuous, he is a stud? It's degrading for the woman, but not for the man?

Hmmm.

 

[Lambchops]

This is fascinating, I wish the left would make up his mind. This woman clearly is a slut In every sense.

Didn't your Bible teach you not to judge?

 

[logger]

Why is it that when a woman is promiscuous, you call her a slut, but if a man is promiscuous, he is a stud? It's degrading for the woman, but not for the man?

Hmmm.

don’t think I ever said that. Hmm.

 

[Lambchops]

Why is it that when a woman is promiscuous, you call her a slut, but if a man is promiscuous, he is a stud? It's degrading for the woman, but not for the man?

Hmmm.

Exactly. Oh, sweet, sweet hypocrisy...