Stormy Daniels Sues the President

[Thermal]

uhhh, about that?:

“The parties are advised that the instant litigation is not the most important matter on the Court's docket. Requests for expedited proceedings, hearings, and discovery not clearly supported by the record and law are discouraged.”

He said the entire motion was premature and that Avennati better think long and hard about bringing a motion to expedite where there are no real reasons to do so.

Exactly. Instant litigation was not the most important. And the motions were premature. That's all. Normal for attys to take some swings with motions and be denied. You're reading way too much into the decision. No one knows enough yet, lacking the answer from Cohen et al. Avaretti just didn't want discovery to drag this out and took a shot. No biggie.

 

[The Big Dog]

So, under this theory, the deal really is between Clifford and Trump. Cohen is just acting to facilitate the deal. He has been appointed by Trump to take care of the details because he is far too busy to go around worrying about paying hush money to every whore he has ever had sex with. He has people for that.

Hmmm.......and you think this will work out well for him?

But now The Donald says he knows nothing, and Cohen's lawyer says D knows nothing, and that doesn't really fit very well with the idea that there's a contract with Trump. Well, I guess it will all get straightened out soon enough.

He did? When?

Last I saw his lawyer said that he would be joining in the request for arbitration, you have different facts?

 

[Thermal]

So, under this theory, the deal really is between Clifford and Trump. Cohen is just acting to facilitate the deal. He has been appointed by Trump to take care of the details because he is far too busy to go around worrying about paying hush money to every whore he has ever had sex with. He has people for that.

Hmmm.......and you think this will work out well for him?

But now The Donald says he knows nothing, and Cohen's lawyer says D knows nothing, and that doesn't really fit very well with the idea that there's a contract with Trump. Well, I guess it will all get straightened out soon enough.

Just a coincidence that his sig doesn't appear on the NDA to insulate him, I'm sure.

 

[WilliamSeger]

uhhh, about that?:

“The parties are advised that the instant litigation is not the most important matter on the Court's docket. Requests for expedited proceedings, hearings, and discovery not clearly supported by the record and law are discouraged.”

He said the entire motion was premature and that Avennati better think long and hard about bringing a motion to expedite where there are no real reasons to do so.

I dunno, the smart thing for TrumpCo to do at this point would be to shut this whole thing down by not filing any more motions and try to back out of this mess as painlessly as possible. So, you're probably right: next step, motion to compel arbitration followed by much more entertainment. Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the thought that if Donnie ever collects any money from Daniels, which I seriously doubt, Melania will get half of that, too.

 

[Meadmaker]

He did? When?

Last I saw his lawyer said that he would be joining in the request for arbitration, you have different facts?

Didn't he (or maybe it was his lawyer, or something) deny that the affair ever happened? Maybe not. It's kind of hard to follow each day's accusations and denials.

 

[The Big Dog]

Exactly. Instant litigation was not the most important. And the motions were premature. That's all. Normal for attys to take some swings with motions and be denied. You're reading way too much into the decision. No one knows enough yet, lacking the answer from Cohen et al. Avaretti just didn't want discovery to drag this out and took a shot. No biggie.

HI! You might want to look up what "instant" means in that context, no?

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/instant

He was referring to the whole case, and I ain't reading too much into the Judge taking three separate whacks at Avenatti in a single order.

 

[The Big Dog]

I dunno, the smart thing for TrumpCo to do at this point would be to shut this whole thing down by not filing any more motions and try to back out of this mess as painlessly as possible. So, you're probably right: next step, motion to compel arbitration followed by much more entertainment. Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the thought that if Donnie ever collects any money from Daniels, which I seriously doubt, Melania will get half of that, too.

Well seeing as how there is no way to do that once one has been sued as a defendant, the smart thing is to shuffle as much of the case over to arbitration and get that locked down tighter than a tick on a titmouse and get whatever is left dismissed or stayed.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

"Bimbo Patrol" is a great name for a band. Just sayin'.

"Beaver Patrol" was a great song. Is that close enough?

 

[Thermal]

HI! You might want to look up what "instant" means in that context, no?

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/instant

He was referring to the whole case, and I ain't reading too much into the Judge taking three separate whacks at Avenatti in a single order.

Yes. The instant litigation. The motion for expiditing the case. It was premature. Not the entire case, as you keep claiming. The instant matter. What confuses you about that?

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes. The instant litigation. The motion for expiditing the case. It was premature. Not the entire case, as you keep claiming. The instant matter. What confuses you about that?

Uh, going to have to go ahead and disagree with you again. "instant litigation" refers to the whole case. If Judge Otero wanted to refer to the "instant motion," as you seem to believe he is doing?

Yeah, he really knows how to do that, mmmyay?

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_...nstant+motion"&hl=en&as_sdt=4,321&as_ylo=2018

There are lots more.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Well seeing as how there is no way to do that once one has been sued as a defendant, the smart thing is to shuffle as much of the case over to arbitration and get that locked down tighter than a tick on a titmouse and get whatever is left dismissed or stayed.

All Daniels' suit asks for is to invalidate the NDA, which is completely meaningless at this point anyway. Anyway, just to add my own conspiracy theory about why Trump is determined to fight this to the bitter end, other than his narcissistic compulsion to "win" at all costs, is that if he doesn't, we're gonna hear about a lot more of these NDAs. (And I think we will, anyway, since Daniels' NDA seems to be a boilerplate.)

 

[The Big Dog]

All Daniels' suit asks for is to invalidate the NDA, which is completely meaningless at this point anyway. Anyway, just to add my own conspiracy theory about why Trump is determined to fight this to the bitter end, other than his narcissistic compulsion to "win" at all costs, is that if he doesn't, we're gonna hear about a lot more of these NDAs. (And I think we will, anyway, since Daniels' NDA seems to be a boilerplate.)

No it doesn't, she wants the entire contract invalidated, including the damages provisions and the parts about the photos/copyrights rescinded.

Basically what she has done is breached the **** out of her contract and now is going ahead and asking the court to declare that is OK.

Protip, that is something else the courts really don't like either.

 

[Thermal]

Uh, going to have to go ahead and disagree with you again. "instant litigation" refers to the whole case. If Judge Otero wanted to refer to the "instant motion," as you seem to believe he is doing?

Yeah, he really knows how to do that, mmmyay?

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_...nstant+motion"&hl=en&as_sdt=4,321&as_ylo=2018

There are lots more.

But what does it matter? A premature motion was denied. Happens all the time. So? Its not exactly case closed, or significant at all. How important the judge views the motion or case is not relevant, unless a decision is fatal. This was a typical litigious swing and miss by Daniels team, not a harbinger of doom.

 

[WilliamSeger]

No it doesn't, she wants the entire contract invalidated, including the damages provisions and the parts about the photos/copyrights rescinded.

By convention, when people introduce a rebuttal with "No it doesn't..." they are asserting a contradiction. Yes, she asking to void the entire NDA, not just the non-disclosure clauses.

 

[The Big Dog]

By convention, when people introduce a rebuttal with "No it doesn't..." they are asserting a contradiction. Yes, she asking to void the entire NDA, not just the non-disclosure clauses.

Deep breathe..... ahhh.

It is a settlement agreement that includes within it non-disclosure agreements. Not all NDA's are settlement agreements and not all settlement agreements include NDA's. When one says that she wants to void the NDA in a settlement agreement that means to me she wants to void the NDA in the settlement agreement only.

One must endeavor to speak precisely.

 

[The Big Dog]

But what does it matter? A premature motion was denied. Happens all the time. So? Its not exactly case closed, or significant at all. How important the judge views the motion or case is not relevant, unless a decision is fatal. This was a typical litigious swing and miss by Daniels team, not a harbinger of doom.

It is a harbinger of doom of an expedited schedule.

Ask a judge whether someone faking up an emergency that isn't one is something they enjoy.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

But what does it matter? A premature motion was denied. Happens all the time. So? Its not exactly case closed, or significant at all. How important the judge views the motion or case is not relevant, unless a decision is fatal. This was a typical litigious swing and miss by Daniels team, not a harbinger of doom.

It matters because TBD really hasn't had a lot to smugly crow about in this administration. He tries, bless his heart, but there's no getting around Trump being a clueless, treasonous moron who's completely out of his depth in any legal system he can't bribe or intimidate his way out of.

This may only be about a minor procedural motion that's the kind of thing you expect a good lawyer to be trying in the off chance it works, but let him have this. Trust me, the next time the tables are turned he'll return the favor by disappearing from the forum for a few days until the conversation moves on and he can slink back without calling attention to himself.

 

[WilliamSeger]

uhhh, about that?:

“The parties are advised that the instant litigation is not the most important matter on the Court's docket. Requests for expedited proceedings, hearings, and discovery not clearly supported by the record and law are discouraged.”

He said the entire motion was premature and that Avennati better think long and hard about bringing a motion to expedite where there are no real reasons to do so.

Actually, even though I'd like to hit fast-forward on this too, it's kinda reassuring that the federal courts have more important matters than this silly case.

 

[The Big Dog]

It matters because TBD really hasn't had a lot to smugly crow about in this administration. He tries, bless his heart, but there's no getting around Trump being a clueless, treasonous moron who's completely out of his depth in any legal system he can't bribe or intimidate his way out of.

This may only be about a minor procedural motion that's the kind of thing you expect a good lawyer to be trying in the off chance it works, but let him have this. Trust me, the next time the tables are turned he'll return the favor by disappearing from the forum for a few days until the conversation moves on and he can slink back without calling attention to himself.

Curious how so many people were hailing the Porn Star's Lawyer's brilliant and fiendishly clever strategy, and then after getting his teeth kicked in by the judge it becomes a "minor procedural matter."

But I did enjoy the "slink back in" nonsense, because I have always been such a shrinking violet, like in this thread where the thread lawyers and all the others have been ineffectually arrayed against me, yet I have been able to refute every objection and teach those who thirst for knowledge.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Deep breathe..... ahhh.

It is a settlement agreement that includes within it non-disclosure agreements. Not all NDA's are settlement agreements and not all settlement agreements include NDA's. When one says that she wants to void the NDA in a settlement agreement that means to me she wants to void the NDA in the settlement agreement only.

One must endeavor to speak precisely.

Suit yourself: All Daniels' suit asks for is to void the "entire contract," which is completely meaningless at this point anyway, because Daniels already blabbed and Donnie will never collect that $20M. Better?