CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
And the LOL's. Money can't buy you LOL's.Avenatti though saw it as a huge opportunity and has received millions of dollars worth of promotion for his practice.
And the LOL's. Money can't buy you LOL's.Avenatti though saw it as a huge opportunity and has received millions of dollars worth of promotion for his practice.
Simple, if Daniels just takes the money and walks, it is over with. Also, there are huge penalties spelled out in those contracts. That's enough to scare most people.
Also, probably lots of lawyers might have been scared off, given they are dealing with a sitting President. Avenatti though saw it as a huge opportunity and has received millions of dollars worth of promotion for his practice.
And the LOL's. Money can't buy you LOL's.
That's a problem. Daniels has only disclosed information about an encounter between her and Trump. In order to hold her in violation of the contract, they have to
1) Admit that DD is Trump, and
2) Admit that it happened.
But if that it is ruled that the NDA was valid in spirit (she signed and took the money), Avenatti could be disbarred for so publically violating its intent, I think?
I wish something could stop Can't Buy Me LOL's running around in my head now. Pop-songs can be soooooo sticky.It probably can, but yes, them too. Also a few LMAOs.
I wish something could stop Can't Buy Me LOL's running around in my head now. Pop-songs can be soooooo sticky.
Ah, this'll do the trick
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVGu0visDbE
In general, I'm just confused. In truth, I do not believe that Trump had no knowledge of this agreement, but until proof is offered I guess we go with the assumption that Cohen's lawyer is telling the truth. If so, how can there be a valid contract?
No he can't. He didn't sign the contract.
I have no doubt Daniels thought it was a valid contract. But contracts are not only between the parties involved but the public. Now the public has an interest in enforcing most contracts, but there are lots of agreements that might not be in the public's interest to enforce and are not valid contracts regardless what the parties might think. Avenatti believes this contract is not valid.
Gee, TBD, I can't remember how many times the judge smacked down Avenatti. Have you mentioned it?
I don't think his signature is necessary. But he does have to step forward if he seeks to have it enforced.I have explained several times with citations that the signature is not necessary to enforce the contract.
No, not who she was banging. But that a married candidate for the highest office in the land in the middle of an election is paying off. You keep thinking the sex is the issue when the real issue is the Presidential election and if it is in the nation's interests that a candidate can simply pay people off to hide their warts from the voters.But the porn stars lawyer thinks that the contract that his client signed is not valid because the public has an “interest” in knowing who she was banged by?
Lolz.
I don't think his signature is necessary. But he does have to step forward if he seeks to have it enforced.
No, not who she was banging. But that a married candidate for the highest office in the land in the middle of an election is paying off. You keep thinking the sex is the issue when the real issue is the Presidential election and if it is in the nation's interests that a cabdidate can simply pay people off to hide their warts from the voters.
Warts who being they ********** a decade ago.
![]()
You can't be this obtuse. Clearly those warts mattered or Trump's lawyer in the waning weeks of an election isn't drawing up an NDA and writing a check for a $130, 000.
The point again is Trump is deciding for the voters what should or shouldn't be important to them. But that isn't Trump's job, Cohen's job or even Judge Otero's job. But you want a judge and Trump's money make that decision for the voters.
Truly you cannot be this obtuse. Clearly those warts matter to Trump’s family life. And 130 k to him is like 13 bucks to you.
The contention that who Trump allegedly had sex with in 2006 matters to the voters is laughably absurd.
Truly you cannot be this obtuse. Clearly those warts matter to Trump’s family life. And 130 k to him is like 13 bucks to you.
The contention that who Trump allegedly had sex with in 2006 matters to the voters is laughably absurd.
You're right. Nobody cares.
That's why it's such a smsll story.
That's why the interview got such tiny ratings
So it was Trump's money after all. Thanks for clearing that up.Truly you cannot be this obtuse. Clearly those warts matter to Trump’s family life. And 130 k to him is like 13 bucks to you.