President Trump‘s personal lawyer Michael Cohen is under fire this week after The Wall Street Journal reported that Cohen used what appear to be shell companies and fake names to pay a porn star called Stormy Daniels $130,000 as part of a nondisclosure agreement. Daniels states in a prior but unpublished interview that she had an affair with Trump that began shortly after Trump married Melania Trump and had their son Baron. She said that the affair lasted roughly a year and the money was paid during the campaign around the time of the release of the disturbing Access Hollywood tape. Cohen has previously denied any affair and insisted that both Daniels (whose real name is Stephanie Clifford) and Trump deny any sexual relationship. The new information has led some to question Cohen’s veracity and the role of an attorney in maintaining such a denial if the representation is untrue. I am less confident that a clear ethical line was crossed by Cohen simply because he used such companies or has maintained the denial of any relationship.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Cohen used a company named Essential Consultants LLC to send the money to Stormy Daniels’ as part of the nondisclosure agreement Both Cohen and Daniels’s lawyers used pseudonyms in executing the deal in October 2016. That was just weeks before the election.
The role of counsel in such a matter is not as clear as some critics have maintained. A lawyer is allowed to advance the position of his client and Cohen repeatedly asserted, including recently, that Trump “once again vehemently denies” such an affair. Cohen added that these are “outlandish allegations against my client” and that the newspaper has “attempted to perpetuate this false narrative for over a year; a narrative that has been consistently denied by all parties since at least 2011.”
Reporters however have said that there are witnesses to elements of the story and that Daniels was given and passed a lie detector when she went into great details about the affair, including rather seedy elements.
For our purposes, the most interesting element is the role of the lawyer. If (for the sake of argument) Cohen believed that there was an affair, would he be ethically barred from making these public comments? The answer is probably not. His client is reportedly telling him that there was no affair and, regardless of what Daniels told In Touch magazine (in an interview that will now reportedly run), she signed a statement denying any such affair.
The use of shell companies and fake names is also not clearly an ethical violation. Sometimes lawyers use such companies to protect their clients, such as when a company is buying land but does not want that fact to be known publicly. Moreover, an agreement of this kind is clearly designed to avoid a public scandal (true or not). Cohen worked to execute the agreement without defeating its purpose with a public disclosure.
Could there be ethical issues arising for Cohen? Yes. This is a precarious role to play for an attorney. This is not just some divorce case or strike suit. The agreement concerned a matter of great public concern over the integrity, morality, and veracity of a candidate for the presidency of the United States. Moreover, there is always a concern of where such funds came from in securing the silence of someone like Daniels.
I hear she was 14 and called him from a nonexistent phone in her bedroom and he signed her yearbook. Folks love fairy tales.
From an interview on Megan Kelley’s show- Stormy asked a friend from the porn world to become a party of three with Trump and she, Stormy. Stormy described to the friend what type of underwear Trump was sporting at the time. The visual turned the friend off.
One thing we can all agree about, is the amount of embarrassment Trump has created in just one year is a singular distinction among U.S. Presidents.
Trump needs to learn that this kind of behavior needs to be confined to the Oval Office.
Didn’t he learn anything from Bill Clinton?
Another example of Trump’s disrespect for precedent.
Yes, of course, because we all know how particular, discerning and picky whores and porn stars are with regard to whom they sleep. F#$k. Blow. Right. Your fantasical tale couldn’t be told with a straight face, so, I suppose that you are lucky to have a computer screen behind which to hide. Yes, it is common knowledge that whores and porn stars are quite discerning with regard to whom they will become intimiate. . .festering, oozing, puss-filled, runny sores, on someone’s body, no problem. . .profound b.o. and less than perfect hygiene, no problem. . .the comingling of bodily fluids and the possible exposure to viruses which are deadly, without the use of protection, no problem. . .but, according to you, a fellow porn star, allegedly, got “turned off” by hearing about the style of underwear worn by Trump. Right. Are you always such an idiot or have you just developed into one?
Relevance?
The relevance? I was simply responding to Linda’s comment, where, purportedly, the character named, Stormy, invited another porn star/whore to join in with her and Trump. Sure. Of course. Makes perfect sense. The fantastical tale continues. . .the invited porn star/whore, with whom Stormy was in discussion, was, purportedly, “turned off” by the visual, described by Stormy, of Trump in his underwear. Yes, porn stars/whores are known for being such delicate, little flowers, who get “turned off” so easily. Their innocent sensibilities are so easily offended. Yes, because porn stars/whores are such discerning beings. Don’t you know, male pornstars/johns, with whom they are in frequent intimate contact, all look like Hugh Jackman and George Clooney. Their co-stars/customers are all scrupulously clean, immaculately dressed and Harvard-educated. As such, a visual, of Trump, in his tight-whities, must’ve made the fellow porn star/whore wanna puke. Poor baby.
Tighty-whities. . .
I’m not embarrassed. I find an unfiltered politician refreshingly novel.
Porn Stars, Virgins, Cousins and Family Friends?
“…the sort of thing that legitimate newspaper people don’t write about or don’t even make any implications about.”
___________________________________________________________________________________
“Once Upon A Secret”
How President Kennedy Seduced a 19 year-old White House Intern — Inside the Bedroom He Shared with Jackie
She was a wide-eyed White House intern just four days into the job when she found herself standing alone next to the most powerful man in the world — in the most intimate room within 1600 Pennsylvania Ave
Kathy Ehrich Dowd September 20, 2017 10:00 AM
She was a wide-eyed White House intern just four days into the job when she found herself standing alone next to the most powerful man in the world — in the most intimate room within 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Mimi Alford (née Beardsley) was all of 19 when she began working in the White House press office in 1962, and almost immediately caught the eye of President John F. Kennedy. While last year’s Jackie movie shed new light on how the first lady created the myth of Camelot after JFK’s assassination, much curiosity remains about their marriage and what Jackie knew.
As Alford details in her 2012 book, Once Upon a Secret, she was stunned when she received a call from Dave Powers, a close Kennedy aide known unofficially as the First Friend, who invited her for a swim in the White House pool. (It didn’t matter that she didn’t have a swim suit, there were plenty available to choose from.)
Bewildered after diving into the pool with two other young, female colleagues, Alford was nearly dumbstruck when the commander in chief himself walked in a short time later.
“Mind if I join you,” the president purred before heading into the dressing room, emerging a short time later in his swim trunks.
“He was remarkably fit — flat stomach, toned arms — for a forty-five year old man,” Alford writes, and details how the two exchanged pleasantries while treading water.
Later that same day, Alford was back at her desk when Powers called again, this time wondering if she would be interested in an informal get-together “upstairs.”
She accepted the invitation, and was stunned to discover that “upstairs” meant the family residence — and she soon found herself sipping daiquiris with an intimate group before the president entered the room.
A short time later Kennedy offered her a private tour of the residence, and it was when they were alone in the bedroom he shared with First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy that he made his move.
“This is a very private room,” Alford writes that he told her after slipping a hand on her shoulder.
“The next thing I knew he was standing in front of me, his face inches away,” she writes. “He placed both hands on my shoulders and guided me toward the edge of the bed.”
A short time later, Alford lost her virginity to the world-renowned leader, and their trysts continued for more than a year.
“I think he did take advantage — I was so young,” Alford told PEOPLE in 2012 of that first intimate encounter. “But I liked feeling special.”
Although Alford faced criticism for revealing so many personal details in the book — she also wrote that JFK asked her to give Powers, and later his brother Teddy, sexual favors (oral sex while JFK watched) — Alford told PEOPLE in 2012 she has no regrets.
“I couldn’t tell the story without those pieces,” she said. “I know there are some difficult parts to that book. And they were difficult for me to write … The fact is, I was vulnerable, and the president was a very powerful man.”
___________________________________________________________________________________
“…the sort of thing that legitimate newspaper people don’t write about or don’t even make any implications about.”
Wapo – Feb 2012
“In 2003, Dallek included a passing reference to a “tall, slender, beautiful nineteen-year-old college sophomore” in his acclaimed biography, “An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917–1963.” More details about the intern came via an oral history by Barbara Gamarekian, a former press aide to Kennedy. Mimi, she said, had a “sort of a special relationship with the president. . . the sort of thing that legitimate newspaper people don’t write about or don’t even make any implications about.” Alford kept the affair a secret, but confirmed it in 2003 after reporters tracked her down.”
___________________________________________________________________________________
“…President Bill Clinton was a guest on “Orgy Island” at least 26 times.”
MEDIUM – Estéban Trujillo de Gutiérrez
Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein’s “Orgy Island.”
“Then we come to the case of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein. Mr. Epstein owns an island in the US Virgin Islands known as Little Saint James, or by insiders, as “Orgy Island.”
Mr. Epstein was in the news because former President Bill Clinton was a guest on “Orgy Island” at least 26 times. Mr. Epstein was reported to procure girls as young as 12 years old to service visitors to the island. Not just for pleasure. Allegations that guests were vulnerable to blackmail after their interactions with underage girls were videotaped were frequent.
____________________________________________________________________________________
BIOGRAPHY
“FDR and His Women”
“… she was deeply wounded to discover that Franklin had been having an affair with her secretary, Lucy Mercer.”
Over the next decade and a half, Franklin rose in politics, while Eleanor struggled to balance demanding social obligations, a series of pregnancies and household duties. In 1918, she was deeply wounded to discover that Franklin had been having an affair with her secretary, Lucy Mercer. She offered Franklin a divorce. Whether Franklin wanted to accept Eleanor’s offer or not, Sara forbade it, threatening to cut off Franklin’s inheritance. Although the marriage continued, this moment was a turning point.
Marguerite ‘Missy’ LeHand In 1920, Marguerite “Missy” LeHand had come to work as Franklin’s secretary. Over the years, they developed a very close relationship, with Missy serving as one of Franklin’s main friends and confidantes. She lived in the White House during his presidency, and when she suffered a stroke, Franklin altered his will to include her. Eleanor and all the children were warm towards Missy and considered her one of the family. Franklin’s son Elliott later revealed that his father and Missy had had a long affair, and it seems likely that the family was aware at the time.
Due to the passage of time, the loss of documentary evidence, and conflicting stories from members of his circle, it’s hard to determine the exact nature of some of Franklin’s relationships. However, it is clear that he had a strong mother, a brilliant wife, and a circle of female friends and lovers who challenged and supported him throughout his life.
(excerpted)
I remember reading, years ago about Trump. . .and one of the few things, which seemed to stick out in my mind, for whatever reason, was that Trump considered himself to be a germaphobe. Yes. A germaphobe. Perhaps, just, perhaps, the reason why that one tidbit was such a standout, at least for me, was because I was reading about an individual who appeared to be an immensely powerful and wealthy man. An immensely powerful and wealthy man whose weakness was, of all things, germs. Germs. Yep. Measly germs, which the average guy just accepts as a normal part of life and for the most part, simply ignores. Not with Trump. He seemed to have an inordinate fear of catching cold, an inordinate fear of catching diseases. . .so much so, he, allegedly, went as far as to refuse to shake hands with individuals in his initial contact with them.
Now, however, we have a “story” that Trump conducted a year-long “affair” with some filthy, dirty, disgusting, disease-ridden trashy porn star. Yeah. I’ll be graphic. A filthy, dirty, disgusting, disease-ridden being, who has, proudly, had unprotected sex with hundreds, if not, thousands, of both men and women. If we were speaking of Clinton, I wouldn’t doubt the story for a moment, but with Trump, given his peculiar fears and sensitivities, I highly doubt the veracity of the rumors. Those who are deathly afraid of exposure to germs, who shy away from handshakes and the obligatory kisses on the cheek, do not, suddenly, change their spots. It doesn’t happen. Could he cheat on his wife or wives? No doubt about it. Perhaps he saw Marland Maples, for example, as safe. Clean. Discreet. Perception is reality. That may have been his reality; however, to expect that an admitted germaphobe, who washes his hands incessantly, out of fear of picking up germs, would ever consider sticking his d!ck into that toxic dump, is beyond the scope of plausible. I don’t think that there’s enough money in the world for him to be able to enjoy any sort of sexual contact with a gutter rat, where his constant fear would have been catching one of her many diseases or infections. As such, the whole story is a fallacy.
Marla Maples. . .
Right on! I don’t think you can wash off STDs in a hot bath. Which, here’s hoping Stormy doesn’t have cooties, but the odds are pretty slim.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
So, given what the statistics claim, does it make any sense, whatsoever, that an admitted germaphobe, like Trump, would choose, of all people, a skanky, germ-infested bimbo, whose only claim to fame is being a porn star, and proceed to conduct an affair, with this human Petri dish? The answer is, no. Now, is he beyond cheating? No, however, his particular idiosyncrasies would prevent his mistresses from being those perceived as germ-ladden and diseased. As such, the whole story, about Trump, makes no sense.
I guess that’s why Melania batted Donald’s hand away when he reached for hers to hold.
Sex predators throw da caution to da wind to get their fix.
Ken – you would have to check with Slick Willy about that.
Ken, you should know.
Ken, I hope you survived this rapier witty retort.
YNOT, too bad you can’t piece things together from prior postings to understand what was being said. I don’t always piece things together to make everything easy. Too bad for you not to have the smarts to recognize that.
Squeeky – you can never wash cooties off, they just fall off as you get older. 😉
I went to see my doctor the other day. He said hello with a smile, shook my hand and promptly went to the sink and washed his hands. We then proceeded with my appointment.
Great point Bam Bam.
I’m curious BB – re ” I was reading about an individual who appeared to be an immensely powerful and wealthy man. An immensely powerful and wealthy man whose weakness was, of all things, germs.” Was that man Howard Hughes?
No, it wasn’t an article about Hughes. It was, most definitely, an article, years ago, about Trump. Before the television show. Before his run for office. Before, anything. The phobia, about germs, stuck out to me. Made an indelible impression. Why? Precisely because he, Trump, was described as such a wealthy person. A highly successful person. Reading, that such an individual, was frightened by germs. . .was terrified of diseases. . .stayed with me. It seemed so out of place. Out of character. What most of us would consider a minor annoyance in life–germs and the contact with said germs–some, regardless of wealth, education or social status, need to navigate their lives around.
Me: “What pseudonyms were used? What were the names of the shell companies?” “Where is the evidence supporting any of the claims since Daniels/Clifford denied any relationship?”
Turley: “Facts are unnecessary. If the allegations are sufficiently inflammatory and salacious, that is sufficient.”
Me: “So you have no facts. You just have a scenario like, “I heard it from and friend who, heard from a friend who, heard from a friend who heard it from the son-in-law of the last friend second cousin?””
Turley: “Well, the Wall Street Journal backs me up. They wouldn’t lie.”
Me: “But does the WSJ provide any facts or do they just repeat wild speculations and inventions?”
Turley: “That doesn’t matter. All that matters that if we all keep repeating this story, it will be believed by a certain percentage of people, and that’s what counts.”
Me: “But don’t you think that’s irresponsible following the Goebbels mantra?’
Turley: “Who’s this Goebbels? And besides this is MY blog and I can put any story out there no matter how ridiculous. In fact, I PREFER ridiculous stories. The truth is not exciting and interesting enough, and besides, if I were to tell the truth it would make people that I support look bad.”
Reblogged this on sdbast.
Wake me up when he lies under oath about sodomy with a cigar on an intern and then puts the cabinet of USA on the white house lawn to defend him. The dems settled this argument 20 rears ago. To paraphrase Hillary this is just a vast left wing conspiracy
If you could get
Him under oath he probably would
Lie since da truth escaped him decades ago,
It is my understanding the Trump cheated on his first wife with his second wife, and he cheated on his second with his third. Correct me if I am wrong.
He was elected with voters aware of his flaw of infidelity. Therefore, the news apparently is that a known adulterer committed adultery, and paid the woman years later for non disclosure. She nevertheless disclosed the affair. Was it extortion?
Infidelity has always bothered me. I am equally appalled that there are married me who cheat as I am that there are women who knowingly sleep with married men. The only ones who get a pass are women who didn’t know the car was married. Aside from that, homewreckers applies to both parties involved. Better to get a divorce and actually be single than to betray your partner and pretend you are so.
If true, then this is repeating that he has a known flaw, which was well understood prior to the election.
What would be bigger news is if he cheats on his wife after elected, when he is now both working for all of us and leading us.
I feel bad for Melania and Barron. I hope the press is kind to them, but unlikely. Chelsea had a rough go of it when her father’s affairs, sexual harassment, and rape allegations came up.
Speaking of which, Trump should learn from his predecessor and tell the truth under oath, whatever the truth may be. Those seeking impeachment would dearly love such a gift, and I predict they will try to put him under oath. Perhaps Mueller will question him about past affairs as part of the Russian investigation overreach in the hopes he’ll lie to a federal investigator.
Trump has never learned anything from anybody, or made a mistake, or been sorry about anything.
She should have demanded $135,000. Take him for all he’s worth.
He said she had a nose like a little beet and looked like his daughter. What is dat worth?
Those of us who voted for Trump knew he had flaws. But his flaws were not as disqualifying as those of HRC. He’s a rich old man who hired a hooker. Big deal. I don’t care. What I care about is that he understands business and how to meet budgets and deadlines and produce something of value. Like it or not, there’s no denying the fact that Trump has built luxury hotels and golf courses all over the world. The Clintons, by contrast, have spent their entire adult lives on the government payroll and are up to their ears in sleeze of every type imaginable.
A new baby in da house is no big deal unless you are da son and da wife of the da sleaze ball. Stormy said he used no condom. He is an abusive SOB to all da kids and da wives and even da grand kids.
More click bait news to hide the fact that unemployment compensation is falling.
Click click click Stormy spanked T rump with Forbes magazine. Kinky kinky spankin and peein with three or four.
Ken, Do you cry baa baa in the barnyard?
You crazy
Then, is it bleat, bleat?
Professor, thank you sooo much for putting the photographer’s name and © symbol with the picture.
That is a rare sight these days in the misunderstood world of copyrights and fair usage.
Happy Friday!
“If (for the sake of argument) Cohen believed that there was an affair, would he be ethically barred from making these public comments? The answer is probably not.”
Except maybe in the legal profession, that is the wrong answer. Helping clients or anyone else achieve an unjust result is just wrong. When resignation or not participating in a wrong is the right thing to do and a viable option (even though maybe in this case Cohen would have lost a valuable client), how does one nevertheless rationalize or justify doing wrong on the basis of legal ethics – zealous advocacy or attorney-client privilege, etc.? One step further in the wrong direction is the assumption (only a chump would assume otherwise) of Cohen’s knowledge of the bad acts – surely the legal profession would frown on making knowingly false public comments. Or would it?
Stormy Daniels is one thing, but what about Candy Kane and Dee Cupps?
I keep hoping that Melania will tire of all this, and sue for divorce. Except no doubt DJT has spies all around her, to report even a whiff of independence on her part.
With anything Trump, it’s only the tip of the iceberg.
I suspect the tip of his iceberg is in his pants.
Pence must be beaming with pride. The Dear Leader can do no wrong, like cheating on wife #3 months after she gives birth.
Christian consistency as always is astronomically heartwarming.
Make Trump Great, America.
Two other distinctions between Clinton and Trump (assuming the allegations against Trump are true) are (1) Clinton’s conduct occurred while he was in office and (2) Daniels was not a White House intern.
Impeachment is, or should be, for misconduct while in office. Misconduct prior to attaining office is a matter for the voters.
Clinton’s conduct smacked of sexual harassment done by a person in power over a young, impressionable woman, sort of the stuff #MeToo is made of. Daniels got fair consideration for her efforts.
If true, Trump’s conduct violated his marital vows, nothing beyond that. Clinton’s conduct embarrassed the entire nation and defiled the White House in addition to the infidelity. Plus, Monica Lewinsky was young enough to be Clinton’s daughter. While some might say “Good for him”, others would say “Yuck!”.
T rump is embarrassing da nation and his wives, children and grand children. Let da porn porn
continue.Bannen said hundreds of em. More of his “stars” will come forward and in 2020 someone will run on da ticket of draining da swamp of da Trump smut.
What a private citizen does inside or outside of his own marriage is his own business and that of his family. What a sitting President does in the White House is the public’s concern. Put another, more blunt, way the public did not elect Bill Clinton to spunk all over the White House with young interns on the public payroll on government time.
Da public did not elect T rump to pay hush hush money to the women he assaulted or da women he had threesomes with. We are headed tonWeinstein ville.
What Trump does with his own money while a private citizen is his own business, even if the payment amounted to extortion. If all of the allegations are true, the extortionist, i.e., Daniels, should be the one getting the heat.
Cohen paid da money in October 2016 during da campaign.
The man isn’t President during the campaign and, assuming the allegations are true, he is using his own money, not public facilities or a publicly funded intern. If you don’t like what Trump did, vote against him next time. Impeachment (or should be) is for misconduct in office.
Do you know that was da end of da hush money? Could have paid some yesterday to some other T rump porno woman yesterday for all ya know.
Once again, I pay attention to the evidence. Where is the evidence that that happened?
Cohen has a long history of this. Bannon said could have paid hundreds. This ain’t da end of this.
What is the “this” that Cohen has a long history of? When you have evidence of misconduct in office, tell me about it and we can have a discussion of whether impeachment is in order. And by misconduct, I don’t mean policies that you disagree with or language that offends you.
Excellent logic Vince.Too many voyeurs on this list. They should find a porn site.
Well said, Vince!
Trump has engaged in affairs all his life. How much would you be willing to bet that nothing took place within the past year? With his wife mostly gone.
Other than sporting events, I am not willing to bet on anything that I don’t have the evidence for. If you think Trump engaged in an affair within the past year, convince me with evidence.
Who cares? Hasn’t anyone ever heard of open marriages or acceptance of mistresses?
The people who care are all the people who are responding to this post.
Allen – spot on! I have never understood why Americans are so hung up on this.
Vince
There have been no proven events where Clinton was anything other than a horn dog. If you describe what he did it was with consenting adults, both having fun. Lewenski was a big girl getting herself off on giving the President of the US a hummer. Clinton was an overly libidinous dude that couldn’t get it up for Hillary anymore-just look at the photos-it happens all the time with most males. In a similar situation most men would unzip. It was and remains no body’s business other than that of Clinton, his partner, and his wife. The shame Willie must really bear is for not standing on that from the beginning instead of pathetically weaseling out with his ‘lawyer speak’. If you want to bring morality into this then you are lost before you begin.
As far as weaseling goes Trump and Clinton are in the same league. As far as uncontrollable libidos, same league. As far as ego goes, Trump’s is far, far, far, more out of control. Clinton is a self made man, a Rhodes Scholar, regardless of his underhanded dealings. Trump is nothing but underhanded dealings, created by inherited wealth, connections, and deceit. In the old lesser of two evils department, Clinton is far, far, far less of an evil, and many times more intelligent.
This is and serves as nothing but a distraction from the more important problems with Trump. He lies rather than tell the truth when it would be to his advantage to tell the truth. Trump is a certifiable narcissistic megalomaniac. Trump’s primary concern is his image which he places well before the best interests of the country.
The legal self gratification of lawyers amateur and professional, with or without prophylactical double talk, serves to distract and for some to create empathy for this buffoon. His supporters compare him to Clinton and his exploits instead of focusing on the harm he is doing. There are far more serious concerns.
Moral relativism. Consensual acts vs rape or non-consent ( where named proof abounds along with the accusations and a conspiracy of threats to shut people up).
I disagree that most men would unzip. Most men would let the big head do the thinking for the little head, not vice versa. Most men have at some point in their lives been in a position where they had a choice to give in to their desires or to resist those desires. There are many reasons why resistance is the prudent course: the woman says no, the location is public, one party is married, there is an employer/employee relationship, etc. Most men would exercise better judgment than did Clinton. Indeed, most Presidents, including those who have had affairs, have exercised better judgment than did Clinton. In the end, if Clinton absolutely could not resist the charm and beauty of Monica Lewinsky, he should have been more clandestine about it (historically the Secret Service will provide the cover) and not become the laughingstock of the entire world. If you believe me to be wrong about this last point, think: the blue dress.
Moreover, the actions of the President in the People’s House with government employees on government time go beyond the President’s wife and family and they go beyond morality, too. Bill Clinton, like everyone else, is expected to respect the public’s property. The fact that Lewinsky was a smitten young woman does not excuse either hers or his behavior. I do not begrudge Clinton for having his affairs, although if my wife ever read this I would be in more trouble than Clinton ever got in. I do begrudge him for abusing his office, by his actions, not his words.
I not begrudge Trump his money. I begrudge neither man for his libido. Nor do I miss the fact that Clinton (Bill that is) came from humble roots. I respect both men’s intelligence and I suspect that both men engaged in shady deals to get where they got.
VJ – while residing in the People’s House the Clintons rented out rooms for donations. Why on earth would you think Bill had any respect for the public’s property?
Indeed, some of these well-heeled “guests” continued on giving: “More than half of the donors who were overnight guests to Bill Clinton’s White House are still giving—this time to Hillary Clinton” during the 2015 primary season.
Fat Cat Hotel
Where to stay in the nation’s capital? If you’re one of the
Democratic Party’s big donors or fund-raisers, your hotel of choice isn’t the Four Seasons or the Ritz-Carlton. It’s the White House.
https://iw-files.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/pdfs/fat_cat_hotel_1996_08.pdf
The Lincoln Bedroom Is Still Paying Dividends
Donors who spent the night in the famous bedroom are now writing checks for Hillary Clinton.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/10/lincoln_bedroom_guests_are_still_donating_to_hillary_clinton_many_of_bill.html
The Lincoln Bedroom Is Still Paying Dividends
Actually, witnesses confirmed Juanita Broderick had a bitten lip and was terribly upset after her meeting with Bill Clinton.
Isaac:
“In a similar situation most men would unzip.” Since you appear to have absolutely no idea, let me explain to you why infidelity is wrong, and why “most men”, if you are right, shouldn’t do it.
If you cheat, you may enjoy the experience for a few hours. And then it’s done. But when you lose your spouse’s trust, that’s gone forever. You no longer are the person she can turn her back on without worrying you’ll stick a knife into it. If she stays with you for some strange reason, then she will wonder if you are betraying her, yet again, every time you come home late, every time you are friendly to a female, every time you leave the house. When trust is gone, it’s gone. The relationship will never be the same as it was before, never as easy and relaxed. There have been some cases where a cheater is discovered, his marriage is falling apart, and he has a crisis of conscience and realizes he is in danger of losing what really matters. It is possible for a marriage to survive, in such a case. But I do not know how often that happens.
When someone is not monogamous, then all parties should be made aware of that fact. It is unethical for a wife (or husband) to believe that she is in a monogamous relationship, safe from sexually transmitted diseases, while in fact her husband could be contracting them and giving them to her. This is 2018. If he were to give her HIV, he will have in effect murdered her in a cold-hearted, slow way. Or he could give her herpes, while will make her subsequent dating life more difficult after they break up. This is the ugly truth. I actually witnessed this happen at the barn between a husband and wife. The husband’s neighbor bragged to him that he slept with a hooker. Shortly thereafter, the neighbor got a cold sore on his lip. After that, his wife got a coldsore on her lip. When confronted, they both admitted what they had done. That is how he found out his wife was cheating on him with someone who slept with prostitutes, and divorced her. Luckily, the now ex-husband escaped the fate of sharing in their STDs. Sometimes, betrayed spouses are not so lucky. Cheating on a spouse and giving them an STD is a form of assault, in my opinion, because you have physically harmed them.
There is always going to be someone young and handsome or beautiful out there. Or someone who tries to sidle up to you and stroke your ego. But they are not going to be there when you are old, or ill, or have dementia, or have cancer.
If cheating is condoned as predictable and acceptable, then what is the result? Shall women have an effective happy life of around 7 years, whereafter she will promptly be divorced and replaced with someone else younger and prettier? Or shall all marriages become a convenience, in which two people sleep with whomever they want but enjoy a tax break? There are consequences to both. We already know the statistical reality of single motherhood for the resulting children. If the institution of marriage breaks up and everyone becomes a disloyal lying hedonist, it will result in misery.
We evolved to reproduce, and to be attracted to others. That is instinct, and there is nothing wrong with appreciating the human form. But we have minds which see the consequences of instant, selfish gratification.
If you want to act single, then be single.
That said, I agree with other posters that whether the story is true or not, it involves past behavior of a man we know to have committed adultery before. It’s hardly Earth shattering, any more than a report that Trump makes inflammatory Tweets. What is important is behavior during the Presidency, and anything illegal.
Danny Williams is a Clinton-made son of Bill and a woman of ill refute.
Okay, she either didn’t do it and is lying in the one report or did do it and may be violating her NDA. Which is it. BTW, I am jealous. 😉
The interview with In Touch was given long before Ms. Cliffords signed the NDA.
I would think that someone with sufficiently deep pockets could insure Ms. Daniels against any penalties arising from violating the NDA.
Hugh Hefner died this year but his legacy lives on with his old threesome loving orange porno friend in da White House. Let’s drain da swamp of these old pervs.
Given that Michael D. Cohen cut his teeth in the Taxi-Cab Medallion Wars of New York, New York, I have every reason to believe that Goody Two-Shoes Turley cares way far more about the ethical dimensions of Cohen’s zealous representation of his client, Trump, than Cohen does–except for the bit about zealous representation, that is. OMG. Cohen’s going to sue for defamation now; isn’t he? Well, that’s what you get when you don’t pay hush money to every last blawg-hound under the sun; you know?