Stormy Daniels Sues the President

[logger]

I'm not aware of any rich prick Democrats doing the same and getting away with it. Are you?

I'm really not partisan. I loathe Trump, but not Republicans or conservatives. I loathe many Republicans, but not all. I dislike some Republicans sometimes, but not others.

The same is true for Democrats. I didn't loathe Hillary, but wasn't overly fond of her. Like so many Republican friends say, going the other way, better than the alternative.

Why should this be a recklessly partisan issue? Lankford, from Oklahoma, often says things I agree with, and often says things I don't. Seems over all a decent guy. Schiff, from CA, often says things that make sense to me. I like his opinions for the most part, but not all of them. Warren says some things I like, but she goes too far for my political tendencies in many areas.

Stormy Daniels is not an issue for me, unless campaign finance laws were violated or other issues arise. It paints Trump as a despicable son of a bitch, but we knew that.

I don’t loathe anyone, just liberalism. And no I’m not aware of any Dems with NDA’s which is why I put the question mark.

 

[acbytesla]

I wonder if any rich prick democrat politicians have done this?

Do you mean promote or enforce?

Both. And some Democrats very well may have paid hush money and I'm against that too. I know a few rich prick Democrats as well. I worked for the Washington State Party for a few years and there are people that fit that description on both sides of the aisle.

 

[acbytesla]

I'm not aware of any rich prick Democrats doing the same and getting away with it. Are you?

I'm not aware either. But that we don't know of any may just signify that it has never been contested before.

Stormy Daniels is not an issue for me, unless campaign finance laws were violated or other issues arise. It paints Trump as a despicable son of a bitch, but we knew that.

Stormy Daniels isn't an issue for me really either. The NDA is the issue for me.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yes, I'm inclined to think the omission was by design, rather than carelessness, to give wiggle room for interpretation

I don't know, he wrote the name of the LLC instead of the agreed upon alias after all. He is not the sharpest spoon in the drawer.

 

[phiwum]

I'm not aware either. But that we don't know of any may just signify that it has never been contested before.


Stormy Daniels isn't an issue for me really either. The NDA is the issue for me.

Sure, I see that. I don't agree with your assessment that this NDA is unenforceable because of the public's right to know, however.

In any case, we can both wait and see.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Yes, I'm inclined to think the omission was by design, rather than carelessness, to give wiggle room for interpretation

I think the whole thing was set up, start to finish, such that Trump could escape any potential **** storm with plausible deniability, but instead he decided he needs to "win" this one.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I think the whole thing was set up, start to finish, such that Trump could escape any potential **** storm with plausible deniability, but instead he decided he needs to "win" this one.

He is a compulsive punchbacker.

 

[acbytesla]

Sure, I see that. I don't agree with your assessment that this NDA is unenforceable because of the public's right to know, however.

In any case, we can both wait and see.

There are some things about our society that is loathsome to me. One should not be able just to buy one's way out of trouble.

My best friend is a Seattle Police officer and he tells me about DUIs. Now he hates drunk driving, but he hates the system of how the laws are enforced 100 times more. If he issues a DUI to someone from the lower economic strata, that person is likely to lose their job and almost certainly be convicted. However, most people with money are able to avoid spending any time incarcerated and almost always are not convicted because they have competent representation.

He has his own way of dealing with this. If you're borderline, and your poor, you might be let go when he thinks you are sober, if you're rich, he's going to arrest you. You may not be convicted, but it's going to cost you. I personally love the way some countries in Europe approach speeding violations where the fines are progressively tied to your income.

To me, this NDA is designed to prevent the public from knowing who they are hiring. And as an employer, I'm entitled to that information and you have no right to ask my help in hiding that. Which is exactly what is happening in this case.

 

[Trebuchet]

He is a compulsive punchbacker.

And backstabber.

 

[The Big Dog]

And as an employer, I'm entitled to that information and you have no right to ask my help in hiding that. Which is exactly what is happening in this case.

Ya hear that folks, he is entitled as an employer, ya see, to get a fairly comprehensive run down on your sex life and marital status....

hoo boy...

 

[CORed]

Strictly speaking I don't know that unless the money came from russia it would fit well within his probe.

It fits Mueller's probe about as well as the Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky issues fit Ken Starr's. Tu Quoque / whataboutism acknowledged.

 

[theprestige]

Acbytesla specifically said "case law."

Unfortunately it's not clear what he means by that term, nor what he's actually wanting from the courts.

 

[acbytesla]

Ya hear that folks, he is entitled as an employer, ya see, to get a fairly comprehensive run down on your sex life and marital status....

hoo boy...

You have no right to ask me to HELP YOU keep a secret from ME. That's just good common sense.

 

[CORed]

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.

We are dealing with Trump here. Today's lies may very well contradict yesterday's lies.

 

[CORed]

The lawyer doesn't get his teeth kicked in unless/until he loses the case. Right now he's exactly where he would have been if he hadn't filed his action "prematurely." No prejudice, no penalty. What's his loss, other than some office time?

Office time that he no doubt billed his client for.

 

[ddt]

Cohen likely signs things for Trump all the time that is one of the things lawyers do.

No doubt about that. But not in this contract. The contract had three lines to sign: one for "PP" (Stormy), one for "DD" (Trump) which was left blank, and a third line for "EC LCC" which was signed by Cohen. So Cohen didn't sign for Trump, only for the shell company he specifically set up for this case.

 

[acbytesla]

Office time that he no doubt billed his client for.

It wouldn't shock me if he took this case pro bono.

 

[WilliamSeger]

No doubt about that. But not in this contract. The contract had three lines to sign: one for "PP" (Stormy), one for "DD" (Trump) which was left blank, and a third line for "EC LCC" which was signed by Cohen. So Cohen didn't sign for Trump, only for the shell company he specifically set up for this case.

The sticky wicket, though, is that the contract is "by and between EC LLC and/or DD on the one part" and Daniels on the other. Most lawyers I've read seem to think Daniels won't be able to nullify the contract on those grounds, even if Trump denies he knew about it.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It fits Mueller's probe about as well as the Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky issues fit Ken Starr's. Tu Quoque / whataboutism acknowledged.

Sure, but the law Ken Starr operated under is different from the one Mueller is. So he is not a good example for what is presently in Muellers purview.

 

[quadraginta]

Watergate was boring until the saturday night massacre. Then Nixon lost half the republican support.

That was back when Republicans attempted to maintain at the very least some semblance of commitment to the ethics and morals they profess so loudly.

Judging from their behavior these past few years, and most especially since Trump took office, I think it would be foolish to expect that sort of rectitude from them now.

They have altogether abandoned even the slightest sliver of a pretense toward anything resembling honor, or duty, or concern for the integrity of our government. They have decided that lies are sufficient, so long as their path to power remains unimpeded.

This is true not only of the politicians, but of the voters who continue to support them, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that such support is undeserved.

The GOP's Congresscretins will never do anything to force Trump out of office, and they will continue to be blindly supported by the voters who put them there.

The only real hope is to muster enough voters to kick enough of them out of office that it is possible to defeat them in Congress.