Bizarre, Lawyering, Media, Politics, Society

Stormy Daniels Declares Settlement With Trump To Be Void And Promises A Full Account Of The Alleged Affair With Trump
800px-Stormy_Daniels_2010
© Glenn Francis, http://www.PacificProDigital.com

images-2I recently discussed the highly problematic statement of Michael Cohen, the personal lawyer for President Donald Trump, that he paid off porn star Stormy Daniels (aka Stephanie Clifford) out of his personal funds. This admission did not necessary end the controversy over possible campaign finance violations but did add some thorny ethical questions.  One of the possible costs was to void the 2016 agreement itself. Both sides reportedly agreed not to speak publicly about the details of the agreement, but Cohen has now done so in media interviews. In response, Daniels is declaring herself free of any limitations and promising to tell her full story. There is also a story that Daniels has a dress that might have forensic evidence linking her to Trump (sound familiar?). She is reportedly shopping her story.  What a mess.  This is the result of a combination of bad lawyering, publicity seeking, and what appears strikingly dishonest public statements.  Non-disclosure agreements are tricky things since the parties will often dance around a breach in the hopes that the other party will trip the wire in response.

The danger for Trump is that Cohen, as previously described, has left him open to an allegation similar to the one that resulted in criminal charges against John Edwards — the use of a third party to conceal an affair as a circumvention of campaign finance laws.  Mueller could conceivably ask about such payments as a possible crime — putting Trump in the same position as Bill Clinton.

 

Daniels has shown herself to be a highly unreliable source for the facts leading up to the 2016 settlement. As previously discussed, she was reported to have finally and clearly denied that she had an affair with President Donald Trump.  A statement was released under her signature with the help of counsel.  However, in her interview with late night host Jimmy Kimmel, she seemed to suggest that it was not her signature. She left the impression that that someone faked her signature, a possible crime.  In addition, if she did not have an affair with Trump, she could be liable for defamation but there are some interesting legal twists.

Kimmel asked if she had a nondisclosure agreement related to her reported relationship with Trump, Daniels replied ambiguously again with “do I?”  Kimmel then noted “if you didn’t have an non-disclosure agreement you most certainly could say you don’t have an non-disclosure agreement, yes?” Daniels  simply replied “you’re so smart, Jimmy.”  This may be Daniels’ notion of clever but she then appeared to deny the authenticity of the signature.  Kimmel noted that the signature looks different and she responded . “That doesn’t look like my signature, does it?”

The coy performance was annoying and most of us were happy to move on from the Stormy Daniels scandal.  She was either lying in 2011 or in 2016 o in 2018 but it was rapidly become immaterial.

However, Daniels seems intent on milking the controversy for publicity and the claim of Cohen voiding the agreement has allowed another news cycle of speculation.  Her lawyer has seemed a virtual prop in this production.  After the Kimmel appearance, Keith Davidson insisted “The signature is indeed hers as she signed the statement today in the presence of me and her manager, Gina Rodriguez.”  He added that “She was having fun on Kimmel and being her normal playful self.”

Now Daniels is playing again and suggesting that she will give a blockbuster interview while dangling this gold dress in a clear Lewinsky-esque reference.

If Trump’s DNA is on the dress, it would require a voluntary exam of DNA to prove it. The problem is that this is not a subject that Mueller is likely to pursue and Trump has not been pulled into a deposition like the one that Bill Clinton faced in the Paula Jones case.  In other words, this is likely to generate more publicity for Daniels but not necessarily new evidence.

As for Daniels and her counsel, patience is running out on the “playful” act.

152 thoughts on “Stormy Daniels Declares Settlement With Trump To Be Void And Promises A Full Account Of The Alleged Affair With Trump”

  2. At this point I just hate Democrats. I hate even uttering the word hate. But seriously, I honestly just hate Democrats. Its terrible that I feel that way but that is what they have done to this country. Nothing but vermin.

    1. So we know what you are not. I’m in the same boat. I think it was a built in fail safe calculus for both parties to establish an either or identity concept. The Democrats failed because people questioned just what the hell they were standing for by belonging to a doppleganger of the GOP. Look for renegades and elevate them on a social media platform. Those clowns at the DNC understand this but refuse to acknowledge it. the Riobbie Mooks of the political world days are numbered.
      Like Autumn, I listen to Jimmy Dior, Styxxenhammer666 and ignore the MSM or Legacy Media.
      Suggestion:
      Tulsi Gabbard.

  3. Well, it seems that the same crowd that loved the case of the blue dress, now says it don’t matter, move on, nothing to see here, she is not to be trusted, she’s a whore who cares. While it might have been consensual with Bill and Donnie, what was good for the goose, is good for the gander.

      1. The chance that Trump will be reelected in 2020 is now exactly zero.
        The chances for a Blue Tsunami in 2018 are now better than 70% and climbing.
        There’s still a 50/50 chance that Trump will serve the remainder of his one and only term of office as POTUS.

        1. Diane, your statements sound rather demented. I guess even after they found the Russians working both sides of the aisle you still can’t put the facts together.

          1. Trump says he believes Putin’s denial of Russian election meddling.
            Trump says The Russian election meddling proves Trump innocent.
            Allan insists that L4D sounds demented.
            Allan insists that Trump is a genius–and a very stable genius, at that.

            1. From the NYT article “Indictment Makes Trump’s Hoax Claim Harder To Sell” linked on the Idaho Pipe Bandit Getaway thread:

              Last November, during a trip to Asia, Mr. Trump said that Mr. Putin had told him that Russia did not meddle, and that he was inclined to believe him.

              “Every time he sees me he says, ‘I didn’t do that,’ and I really believe that when he tells me that, he means it,” Mr. Trump said. “I think he is very insulted by it,” he added, “which is not a good thing for our country.”

              1. “Trump says he believes Putin’s denial of Russian election meddling.”

                When did Trump say that? Can you provide the quotation?

                “Trump says The Russian election meddling proves Trump innocent.”

                That wasn’t exactly what Trump said, but since Rothstein said that no Americans were involved that would include Trump.

                “Allan insists that L4D sounds demented.”

                Many of your statements demonstrate a mind that is not always lucid.

                “Allan insists that Trump is a genius–and a very stable genius, at that.”

                Since I don’t know how the term genius is being used I can’t comment, but he is a smart and competent man.

            2. From the NYT article linked above in Trump’s own words:

              “Russia started their anti-US campaign in 2014, long before I announced that I would run for President,” he wrote on Twitter. “The results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong – no collusion!”

              1. So Trump believes Putin’s denial of Russian election meddling and Trump says Mueller’s indictment of 13 Russians for election meddling proves that the Trump campaign did nothing wrong and there was no collusion. Thus Trump believes that there was no Russian election meddling and Trump believes that there was Russian election meddling. Obviously Trump knows not what Trump believes. Trump’s “just saying.”

              2. You don’t call an enemy with nuclear weapons a dirty liar. Trump simply has a bit more savoir-faire than you and perhaps the NYTimes as well.

      2. Excerpted from the article linked above:

        The Russian operation began four years ago, well before Mr. Trump entered the presidential race, a fact that he quickly seized on in his defense. “Russia started their anti-US campaign in 2014, long before I announced that I would run for President,” he wrote on Twitter. “The results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong – no collusion!”

        But Mr. Trump’s statement ignored the government’s conclusion that, by 2016, the Russians were “supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump” and disparaging Hillary Clinton, his opponent. Working out of the office in St. Petersburg, the Russians described waging “information warfare against the United States of America,” according to court documents.

        1. It turns out the Russians were working both sides of the fence. They were doing what Democratic operatives such as Kramer did with money from the DNC caught on video by James O’Keefe who puts a bit of light on the lies from the left and the media (including the NYTimes). If the Russians were indicted, Kramer certainly should have been indicted as well along with those that paid him. However, we have the NYTimes available to forget reporting news that occurred while reporting things that never happened. …And we have people like you that don’t care about the truth and are ignorant of the world around them.

        1. Turley has to be fact-checked, constantly. In this case, he’s close enough to the mark to pass inspection. The day before yesterday he was nowhere near the target.

          P. S. Why do you call NBC and Newsday click-bait for Stormy Daniels? Do you have astigmatism, too?

  7. So the allegations are he schtupped this broad before he was President, not in the Oval Office and he didn’t use cigars, so what’s the problem. Oh I see he’s not a Democrat like Franklin D, JFK and of course Kuba Kuba Clinton.

    1. Zambini

      All that plus the fact that Trump acknowledged everything except to his wife.

      1. You mean Franklin told Elenor, JFK told Jackie and Kuba Kuba Clinton told Hillary.

  9. Could we just go on to something meaningful? Such as whether pigs have wings?

  10. Two points to calm everyone down:

    1. Voiding the agreement would require Daniels returning the money – not much chance of that happening, right?

    2. DNA testing presupposes that Daniels has not laundered the dress since 2011.

        1. Vince, Ms. Cliffords appears to be a smart woman. She is, at one and the same time, avoiding a defamation suit (by denying an affair with Trump) and violating her non-disclosure agreement (by insinuating that her denial of an affair with Trump is not to be believed) without being sued for breach of contract; the latter of which lawsuit, in turn, would require Cohen and Trump admitting that such a contract exists in the first place. So, in order to sue Ms. Cliffords for violating the non-disclosure agreement, Cohen and Trump have to admit to having paid hush money to Cliffords in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement about an affair between Stormy and The Donald.

          Wait a second. My first sentence is clearly wrong. Ms. Cliffords is a smart woman–and a smart businesswoman, at that. You might even say that Stormy is a better than Trump at The Art of The Deal.

          1. Unfortunately, Stormy has admitted both that she had the affair and that she did not have the affair and that there was an agreement and that there was not an agreement. In any lawsuit, the opposing party can point to her inconsistent statements to impeach her credibility. Plus, she has admitted the contract, thereby obviating the need for Cohen/Trump to prove the existence of one. Moreover, her signature can be easily proven or disproven. Maybe not so smart.

            1. Fine Vince. But Trump has to file a suit against Ms. Cliffords first. Either defamation for claiming the affair, or breach of contract for violating the non-disclosure agreement by claiming the affair. Meanwhile, without a lawsuit, there’s nothing to stop Ms. Cliffords from both claiming and denying her affair with Trump. If Trump sues for defamation, then Trump has to explain his motive for entering into the non-disclosure agreement with Cliffords. If Trump sues for breach of contract, then Trump has to explain Cliffords’ repeated denials of her affair with Trump. Let’s compromise and say that Stormy is clever.

              1. What Diane is saying is that blackmail works even with innocent people and that she applauds blackmail if it suits her ideological needs.

                That is exactly the way Stalin felt and acted.

            1. And then there’s sexual misconduct alleged by Jessica Drake, who is both a friend and colleague of Stormy Daniels. Trump is a sexist pig and a misogynist.

              1. “Trump is a sexist pig and a misogynist.”

                Diane, Having sex with multiple women, your claim, doesn’t mean a person is a misogynist unless you believe the sexual act is misogynist by itself. In that case, you would have to call the father of your children a misogynist which wouldn’t be a nice thing to do.

          3. Stormy is playing a game that is done all the time. It’s a basic form of blackmail. No one needs to have done anything wrong. All that is necessary is that perception becomes more real than reality. She was in the right place at the right time so she has a hook supported by a lot of left wing morons.

            The truth is not important for the claim is personal and shouldn’t be of interest to anyone but Trump and his family. It happened in 2006. If she sold her body to a rich guy who believed she was discreet then she has limited her future sales only to those where discretion is not required and thus carries a lower payment. So why would she do that? Because there are enough morons that focus on this type of garbage to make the potential story more valuable than the sex.

  12. it would have some meaning if it was coming from a segment of the population with a record of morals, values, ethics, and standards but the freaking Hillary Lovers? Get real not worth discussing with the scum of the nation

  13. Is there any doubt a self-professed, porn-star is anxious to enhanced her own publicity? As implied, by “milking the controversy’ she becomes, in her own mind, more desirable & rich. Can only assume Daniels is a stormy, progressive seeking to excoriate President Trump! Thus, the question. How much $$$$ is coming from the Clinton Foundation?

  14. If Trump had the opportunity to pork her then he should have. She is a fox. She is created on this earth to attract men and some women who are bent. A guy who has the chance toe have sex with her and opts out of it is a fool. I don’t want a fool for a President. John Kennedy would have porked her for sure. So would LBJ. He was after all: All The Way With LBJ. She would probably charge LBJ a bit more.

  15. Hey Turley — if you’re gonna peddle garbage, why don’t you publish the dirt about your own sex life — and please give all the sordid details. Of course, I won’t read that, either.

    1. LOL, Bill, what a shame these aholes have to address these truths , yeah but they block my post yet you got through their control lines. LOL These Amerkin hatin Trash have had there way with us 4 to long & now people can & are coming out of there foxholes & exposing these creeps 4 what they truly are. I’m watching it.

  16. Seriously, is there anything more pitiful than old, tore-up-from-the-floor-up, shameless, desperate and sagging whores? I’ll try to come up with something, but, at the moment, I just can’t.

  17. It sounds like she is simply titillating everyone with the idea of the scandal to drive up the price to the highest bidder, perhaps dangling the dress along for a bundled deal.

    Maybe she could hoodwink the DNC into driving itself further into debt by pairing them against the administration in a bidding war. I say up the ante by throwing in some dirt on a prominent democrat to lock both sides into a death spiral. The more money wasted on this, the fewer political ads we might suffer later.

    The intrigues of the political class in many ways is no better than the banality of the Jerry Springer Show.

  18. Really, I do not care who Trump bonked when and where. This is all about money for Stormy. It is not going to end well for her.

    1. For someone like that, there is no “bad” publicity. Her hourly fees will no doubt skyrocket.

      1. Jay S – she is on some sort of stripper tour anyway, so this will help. Maybe she will bring out the alleged dress at the end of the act.

  20. I’m not sure why this is newsworthy. Of course Stormy and Omarosa are milking their fleeting Trump connections for as much money as they can get. But why should the rest of us care? This story is even more of a yawn than Omarosa’s take on Pence’s religious practices.

    1. Turley after all is a lawyer, what do you expect self reflection and humility? When compared to the smugness and incompetence of the current and past FBI directors or the clueless Tribe he may still be the better choice to tolerate.

Comments are closed.