Stormy Daniels Declares Settlement With Trump To Be Void And Promises A Full Account Of The Alleged Affair With Trump

© Glenn Francis,

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”

  1. Thank goodness for Jon Turley’s website! While such trivial news items as the FBI’s failure to follow-up on obvious leads to track the soon-to-be mass murderer Nikolas Cruz are the “hot” news on some news outlets, Jon Turley covers the REAL important material that all Americans should be obsessed with: Stormy Daniels. I believe that all-Stormy Daniels coverage of the vital Stormy Daniels issues should be replace all other stories on this website. And if a little variety is needed, Jon Turley can simply focus on one of his other obsessions: i.e., discussing objects, such as drugs, money, gold, etc. that criminals like to store in their rectums.

    Keep up the great work, Jon Turley!

    1. Is it the FBI’s fault that A R 15’s are available, for purchase, to any 18 year old? I mean, if you’re concerned about security, that aspect of the case might seem most significant.

      1. Seriously? You just said that. The Constitution and the 2nd Amendment have been extant since 1789. The FBI must have certainly been aware of the dominion of those documents when it was established in 1908. I would not be surprised to find that the FBI has taken an oath to support the Constitution including the 2nd Amendment.

        Excuses are like elbows, everybody’s got two.

    2. Did you say “FBI failure to follow-up”? Given to understatement, are you?

      Christopher Wray must resign and be prosecuted for gross negligence, dereliction, corruption and incompetence.

      The entire “7th Floor” must be prosecuted and/or demoted and reassigned.

      If this were Japan a few short decades ago, the inestimable Mr. Wray would have already committed hara kiri.

  2. When you have a transaction and you get paid for your service then you have no claim down the road that more money is due. I think she admitted to having sex with The Donald for a certain fee. Over and done. She is not owed more. If she wants to talk about how good the roll in the hay was way back when, then let her yak. Then the next hooker can decide it the amount of money is right. Pork em if ya gottem Donald. You too Clinton. You too Reagan.

  3. Obama wasn’t perfect but can anyone imagine Obama doing 1% of what Trump has done? Imagine the Republican response if you changed the name. In case anyone forgot here’s a refresher:

    When Obama first ran, his critics tried to label him as a 1960’s style black separatist. When that didn’t work critics attacked his Christian preacher as being radical. When that didn’t work his critics labeled him a Muslim. When that didn’t work critics labeled him a Kenyan witch-doctor. When that didn’t work critics claimed he would take their guns away.

    Obama tolerated this non-sense for 8 years and his critics found nothing. If you are a racist, just man-up to it!

    1. Obama wasn’t perfect but can anyone imagine Obama doing 1% of what Trump has done?

      Bwahahahahahaha! That’s precisely why Trump got elected! Turn that around. If Obama had done 1% in his 8 years in office of what President Trump has done in 1 year, we very likely would not have a President Trump.

      More popcorn please!

      1. Obama inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression. Bush and the GOP-controlled Congress were social-conservatives but fiscal-liberals.

        Bush and friends inherited a balanced-budget from Bill Clinton. Even if you deduct wartime spending, these GOP fiscal-liberals spent money like drunken sailors.

        Imagine the GOP reaction if Obama was paying for sex or refused to release his tax returns!

        Facts are facts!

        1. Imagine the Democrat’s reaction if Trump was paying for state sponsors of terror to develop a nuclear weapons program or sell our national security interests to Russia, or refused to release his college records, or paying foreign entities to put together a fake dossier used to spy on his political opponents and funnel money into his own foundation.

          Facts are facts!

          1. We don’t know what T rump is paying for other than money paid to people to keep their mouth shuts about his mobstering and whoring. It is all gonna come out. Too many crooks in this kitchen.

        2. “Obama inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression.”

          Bull. Obama took a poor economy that was hit with a housing failure (caused by socialist ideas) and then proceded to make the economy worse. You guys can’t accept responsibility for anything.

        3. MLK’s–Sorry to have to correct you, but your historical facts are incorrect. The House of Representatives and the Senate were controlled by the Democrats during the last 2 years of the Bush Presidency. Bush was handcuffed as a result. The Democrats deserve quite a bit of blame for the economic problems inherited by Obama.

      2. The left still can’t comprehend that their ideology cost the lives of over 100 Million people (outside of war). Nor can they comprehend that American capitalism and property rights have elevated the lives of hundreds of millions if not billions. They cannot learn from their own mistakes and they cannot learn from the successes of others.

          1. Europe can’t be like us. They have a different mindset and that mindset prevents them from becoming a powerhouse like the US. Of course, until President Trump came along we were becoming more like them with stagnant wages, unemployment and future reductions in the standard of living.

          2. Awake from your slumber. America is just like Europe which is just like China which is just like every other nation on the planet. All countries have been compelled to impose central planning, redistribution of wealth and social engineering. America has abrogated the Constitution and, like the rest of the world, gone the communist way.

            Happy “Affirmative Action Privilege” and generational welfare to you, comrade.

              1. Russian troll farms have done everything they can to slime Mueller but he stands heads above the orange sex fiend slimeball t rump and da guy that has got the goods on him Putin.

                1. Why in the world are the taxpayers spending millions on a Mueller investigation when you have all the intel for free?

                  1. I have no intel. Why does T rump need attorneys when he has you to defend him Johnny in da spot.

      1. Trump’s only reaction so far is to claim that he is innocent of everything, even though the indictments do not claim he did (so far). More pointedly, he has not made any statement as to what his administration will do to forestall this from happening again and protect America. To him, it’s all about protecting Trump.

        1. If you read today’s reports you will see indictments of Russians for involving themselves in our elections in order to disrupt our nation. You will hear Rosenstein saying Trump was not involved. The left has done a good job helping Putin get what he was looking for. Those that were arrested helped both sides even creating rallies for both candidates in the same city on the same date. I don’t think they were successful with these Russian operatives, but they sure were successful in getting the Democrats to help them along. Of course, we have known about these actions for years, but Obama debating Romney said the Russians weren’t a problem. Apparently, the Russians only become a problem if that can disrupt the results of a legal election the Democrats don’t like. Even before that the Russians were involved in buying our uranium and keeping the FBI at bay since that was under FBI investigation that was successfully kept quiet. They also are probably behind the Steele dossier that the DNC and Hillary paid for.

          You have an odd idea of what has been going on. The FBI has been busy protecting Hillary and following the orders of those top officials that have been dirty. The question now is whether or not the FBI was too busy to save the lives of those 17 children due to operatives of the Democratic Party within the FBI that were doing Democratic dirty work instead of protecting the people.

  4. “milking the controversy for publicity”? Sound familiar? Sort of like Fatso threating to show up to “comfort” the families of murdered children, despite the fact that one of his first acts as play-President was to abolish the administrative rule requiring FBI background checks for potential gun purchasers to include checking the Social Security database for names of persons adjudicated to be incompetent to handle their own financial affairs. Yes, Fatso did this, because, after all, don’t we want well-armed incompetent people running around, even those who lack the capacity to pay their own bills?

    Seriously now: if Fatso or anyone in his chaotic administration reads this blog: Please, please do not show up in Florida to co-opt attention in this tragedy or to try to appear “presidential”. You aren’t. You’ve flunked, despite a year in now. Please believe the polls that say that most Americans don’t like you, don’t trust you and want you gone. More Americans voted for HRC. This is a time of grieving for parents whose children were taken away under unthinkable circumstances. This is not a free publicity event for you. If you have any decency, Fatso, please, please stay away. Your mere presence is a distraction and added stressor. Having the Secret Service present is an added stressor. Having the cameras there to photograph the Slovenian Princess’s latest designer outfit is an added stressor. Flying your play-President airplane to the destination inconveniences other air travelers, and these families may have other family members flying there for funerals or just for comfort. If you really want to appear “presidential’, in the sense of putting the good of the country first–stay away! You are poison.

    1. “despite the fact that one of his first acts as play-President was to abolish the administrative rule requiring FBI background checks for potential gun purchasers to include checking the Social Security database for names of persons adjudicated to be incompetent to handle their own financial affairs.”

      From the Social Security website:

      “If you’re reading this, you probably are one of several million people who receive monthly Social Security benefits or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments and need help in managing your personal money affairs. In that case, Social Security has carefully selected a person, or an organization, to help you by being your “Representative Payee”.

      The information you read here should help you better understand why you have a payee and how the payee helps you. We have included some frequently asked questions and answers. If, after looking at this site, you still have questions, be sure to contact us.

      Why Do I Have A Payee?

      There can be many reasons why Social Security decides someone needs a payee. However, it’s usually because we have information that indicated you need help in managing your money and meeting your current needs.”

      Not exactly the same as mentally ill. In fact, one can be incapable of handling one’s own financial affairs strictly because of physical impairments.

      Moreover, one may have a representative payee appointed just because one spends too much money foolishly — say, to televangelists or to shopping networks. Why should that be a disqualification to own a firearm?

      But the Obama administration lumped everyone with a representative payee into one group and reported them as mentally defective (without any judicial adjudication).

      1. Someone who “need[s] help in managing their financial affairs” wouldn’t include someone with “physical impairments”. What kind of physical impairments would result in the need for someone to handle an otherwise-competent person’s finances, anyway? Social Security payments are electronically deposited, so even if someone were blind or paralyzed, they wouldn’t need to have their payments diverted to someone else for handling. These are usually people who are mentally ill, senile or otherwise unable to handle their affairs, and they shouldn’t be armed.

        1. Well, first of all, “managing financial affairs” primarily involves making payments, not receiving deposits. Second, you should read the physician’s form, which specifically contemplates physical disability as a basis for for being found incapable of managing social security benefits .

          “Do you believe the patient is capable of managing or directing the management of benefits in his or her own best interest?
          By capable we mean that the patient:
          • Is able to understand and act on the ordinary affairs of life, such as providing for own adequate food, housing, clothing, etc., and
          • Is able, in spite of physical impairments, to manage funds or direct others how to manage them.”

          In other words, either mental or physical disability (or both) might be a basis for a finding of incompetence.

          In any event, “usually” is not “always,” and you obviously agree that “otherwise unable to handle their affairs” is something different than “mentally ill” or “senile.” The Obama rule refused to recognize any such distinction.

      2. From the form: “examples include senility, severe brain damage and chronic schizophrenia.” Yes, I want senile, brain-damaged and schizophrenics to be well-armed. Doesn’t everyone?

        1. Nice truncation Natacha. The entire paragraph seems a bit less supportive of your position:

          “Some individuals age 18 and older who have mental or physical impairments are not capable of handling their funds or directing others how to handle them to meet their basic needs, so we select a representative payee to receive their payments. Examples of impairments which may cause incapability are senility, severe brain damage or chronic schizophrenia. However, even though a person may need some assistance with such things as bill paying, etc., does not necessarily mean he/she cannot make decisions concerning basic needs and is incapable of managing his/her own money.”

          1. If a person, due to impairment, needs help with paying their own bills and cannot even direct others on paying them, they have no business owning a gun. The majority of these people are mentally impaired. Why do you defend Fatso, any way? Do you want incompetent people owning guns? If so, why?

            1. “If a person, due to impairment, needs help with paying their own bills and cannot even direct others on paying them, they have no business …”

              Where government spending is concerned that seems to include all Democrats and many Republicans.

            2. The “majority” is not “all.” They cast the net too wide and administratively disqualified people who did not meet the criteria set forth in 18 USC 922.

            3. For example, I have disability clients with chronic fatigue syndrome. They need help with their financial affairs because of a physical condition, but are most certainly not “mentally defective” within the meaning of 18 USC 922(g), or have they been adjudicated mentally defective. It is a matter of due process — section 922(g) requires an adjudication, but the Social Secutity Administration is not the arbiter of competence generally, state courts are, and the SSA did not provide a forum to determine whether any individual with a representative payee was in fact competent. They simply assumed that they were not and reported them to the FBI for inclusion in the NICS database.

    2. Good lord, go get some help.
      In the mean time name ONE, just one candidate you support for the Democratic nomination for the next presidential election please.
      Get over it.
      And while you are at it don’t be a fat shamer.

    3. His princess was a workin class girl from a commie family. They got chain migration goin on. She gets paid a lot but as each new mistress pops she knows he ain’t no prince.

  5. Here is the big news of the week. After a ten percent correction, the market is back up.

    here is the second biggest news. NK participates in SK Olympiad.

    Here is the third biggest news. crazy kid shoots up school after failures by LE including the FBI to properly investigate his unstable, evil self.

    Here is the fourth biggest news. Collapsing Russian-collusion narrative against Trump, reveals Hillary’s team colluding with Russians against Trump, thus ironically accomplishing through disinformation what it could not accomplish through phony FB ads: undermining the validity of the election by propping up the phony attack on the legit winner, Donald Trump

    where is the media on any of this. they ignore number 1, they fail to appreciate the historic signficance of number 2, they somewhat cover 3, and they totally ignore 4.

    On to Stormy Daniels and her allegedly sperm stains. PATHETIC!

    1. I am surprised by how much time is spent on “news” that is really about sex. What a waste. I don’t understand why a supposed affair (especially after what we know about Kennedy and Clinton) Trump may have had garners any interest at all.

      1. That is because the Democrats have nothing more than sex and scandal to offer the American people. The Democrats tried to woo the American people with debt, unemployment, corrupt government and all the things heinous governments do to their people but that didn’t work so now they are trying sex and scandal.

    2. “Collapsing Russian-collusion narrative” ??? Haven’t you been listening to the news today?

  6. Americans need to knock this through their thick puritannical skulls: powerful men want sex.

    That they get it, is NOT news.

    Monica was not news. Bill allegedly raping women, was news.
    The media strategically talked about the lesser thing, ignoring the bigger.
    Now they have utterly failed in their Russia collusion fantasy, now on to this garbage.
    Really pathetic

    Grow up!

  7. Anyhow, these women were happy to have sex with the Donald or so they say, and they took money, now they want another moment of fame. Disgusting! One might say he was a fool twice for being with them, paying them, and not getting the benefit of the second bargain. The third time, each woman is “milking it” in a shameful and pathetic way. The shameless media runs with it, really sad. That’s why nobody I know even bothers watching tv anymore, it’s all garbage!

  8. JFK, Monster
    By Timothy Noah

    “I knew that John F. Kennedy was a compulsive, even pathological adulterer, given to taking outlandish risks after he entered the White House. I knew he treated women like whores. And I knew he had more than a few issues with his father about toughness and manliness and all that. But before I read in the newspaper that Mimi Alford’s just-released memoir, Once Upon A Secret: My Affair With President John F. Kennedy And Its Aftermath, described giving Dave Powers a blow job at JFK’s request and in his presence, I didn’t know that Kennedy had an appetite for subjecting those close to him to extreme humiliation.”

    1. Men who think they have power over others need proof of that; ergo the Powers incident. Why would Powers allow that? Even knowing Kennedy and Clinton sexcapades, women revere them both. Go figure?

      1. Thus the imperative to repeal the 19th amendment. Thank you. Enough incoherence and hysteria. America needs American babies. The birthrate is in a “death spiral”. Women need to perform the function that nature assigned – to perpetuate and grow the population sufficient to defend the nation. America’s economy needs to be taken back from China so that men can support their families. America’s population is being imported. In 100 years, there won’t be an American left in America; there won’t be an America. There will be only about 700 million Caucasoid people on the planet in 50 years.

        1. George,
          So through your extensive root cause analysis of all the problems facing the United States today, you’ve concluded that the franchise should be limited to the male of the species. How very Sharia of you. Your kind of enlightenment will have us back in the Dark Ages within your predicted years.

          1. Thanks for reading.

            “…to ourselves and our posterity,…”

            The American Founders established “the franchise” and wrote the Constitution. I would be lying if I made a claim to that honor. There are quite a few folks throughout history who have thought highly of the Constitution. It’s not likely that the Founders’ thinking on “the franchise” was far behind. If the Founders wrote the Bill of Rights as the sole, appropriate ten amendments and saw fit to write no more, who would I be to disagree. It’s somewhat disturbing that you equate the American Founders with “Sharia”.

            Interestingly, the Ten Commandments have made it through quite bit of history without “amendment”.

            Was it coincidence that America’s decline into global communism began and the 19th amendment was imposed on America in the early 20th century?

            Obviously you agree with extinction and a fertility rate in a “death spiral” and importing the American population. You’re a great American. You want to watch your country and your countrymen disappear. I think Americans do have the right to extinction as assembly (assuming disassembly) or per the 9th amendment. Enjoy the Island of Dr. Moreau as your country and countrymen fade into the sunset. You are an American, right?

            “More Non-Hispanic Whites Died Than Were Born in U.S. Last Year”

            – Newsweek
            By Jason Le Miere On 6/22/17 at 10:53 AM

            “The non-Hispanic white population was the only race or ethnic group to experience more deaths than births between July 2015 and July 2016, according to data released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau. Over the same time period, the Asian and Hispanic populations saw the largest increases, as the United States continues to become more diverse.”

            Goodnight, America.

            1. If the Founders wrote the Bill of Rights as the sole, appropriate ten amendments and saw fit to write no more, who would I be to disagree. It’s somewhat disturbing that you equate the American Founders with “Sharia”.


              Your reverence for our founding fathers is appreciated but your wordplay doesn’t pass the logic test.

              If the framers had no intention for additional amendments, if they believed all that was written was all that was appropriate, then they would not have written the first 10 as amendments. They would have fixed them within the document without any means to amend the constitution. I will agree what was included was appropriate for the 18th century culture.They needed a ratified form of government so as to not waste the effort to become an independent nation. But to argue the 19th was a mistake is to argue against the DoI. And denying equality and the security of rights for everyone is precisely what you would expect from countries living under Sharia Law.

          2. Ben Franklin, 1754
            Observations concerning the Increase of Mankind,
            Peopling of Countries, &c.

            1. Tables of the Proportion of Marriages to Births, of Deaths to Births, of Marriages to the Numbers of Inhabitants, &c. form’d on Observaions made upon the Bills of Mortality, Christnings, &c. of populous Cities, will not suit Countries; nor will Tables form’d on Observations made on full settled old Countries, as Europe, suit new Countries, as America.

            2. For People increase in Proportion to the Number of Marriages, and that is greater in Proportion to the Ease and Convenience of supporting a Family. When Families can be easily supported, more Persons marry, and earlier in Life.

        2. “The birthrate is in a “death spiral””

          Article O of the Constitution.

          All woman shall bear children, the number of which shall be determined by George. Those children shall be divided by those permitted to vote and those not permitted. The former will be known as men and the latter as women.

          Signed: George

            1. Squeeky, that is the one place where George inserts international law into our own. 🙂

              1. I went looking for it, and I found it!

                P122 Right of Carrying off Women

                Let us say a few words on a more singular case, since authors have treated of it,—a case in which at present people are never reduced to employ force. A nation cannot preserve and perpetuate itself except by propagation. A nation of men has therefore a right to procure women, who are absolutely necessary to its preservation: and if its neighbours, who have a redundancy of females, refuse to give some of them in marriage to those men, the latter may justly have recourse to force. We have a famous example of this in the rape of the Sabine women.† But though a nation is allowed to procure for itself, even by force of arms, the liberty of obtaining women in marriage, no woman in particular can be constrained in her choice, nor become, by right, the wife of a man who carries her off by force;—a circumstance which has not been attended to by those who have decided, without restriction, that the Romans did not commit an act of injustice on that occasion.‡ It is true, that the Sabine women submitted to their fate with a good grace; and when their nation took up arms to avenge them, it sufficiently appeared from the [322] ardor with which those women rushed between the combatants, that they willingly acknowledged the Romans for their lawful husbands.

                We may further add, that if the Romans, as many pretend, were originally only a band of robbers united under Romulus, they did not form a true nation, or a legitimate state: the neighbour-[180]ing nations had a just right to refuse them women; and the law of nature, which approves no civil society but such as is legitimate, did not require them to furnish that society of vagabonds and robbers with the means of perpetuating itself: much less did it authorise the latter to procure those means by force. In the same manner, no nation was obliged to furnish the Amazons with males. That nation of women, if it ever existed, put itself, by its own fault, out of a condition to support itself without foreign assistance.


                Squeeky Fromm
                Girl Reporter

                1. Very interesting. Thanks. I will have to look more deeply into that book and its site. The one thing I question is why there was no mention of how to determine the number of women needed. An interesting question. Some men will say one, but others might respond with two or more. 🙂

                  1. The Law of Nations is usually cited by George in reference to the Natural-Born Citizen argument. Context is everything when reviewing original sources documents. I’m not confident George is concerned with context.

        3. “The birthrate is in a “death spiral” ??

          Does America seem sparsely populated to you? If so, why has so much fertile farmland been paved over with strip malls and shopping mega-centers? If so, why are so many people stuck in traffic so much of the time? If so, why does New Jersey stink? If so, why is real estate so expensive in so many places?

          In my opinion, America would be a much more pleasant place if there were only half the present population, maybe many fewer.

          Your posting suggests that, to paraphrase the Germans so many years ago, instead of lebensraum, we need to have lebenskinder.

  9. “FDR and His Women”

    “… she was deeply wounded to discover that Franklin had been having an affair with her secretary, Lucy Mercer.”

  10. “Clinton pays Paula Jones $850,000”

    Associated Press
    Wed 13 Jan 1999 13.15 EST

    “WASHINGTON (AP) – Paula Jones is awaiting the arrival of an $850,000 cheque from President Clinton, bringing an official end to the four-year saga spurred by her allegations of sexual harassment.”

  11. Bill Clinton as enabled by Hillary Clinton

    1. Eileen Wellstone (1969) Allegation: Sexual assault

    2. Anonymous female student at Yale University (1972) Allegation: Sexual assault

    3. Anonymous female student at the University of Arkansas (1974) Allegation: Sexual assault

    4. Anonymous female lawyer (1977) Allegation: Sexual assault

    5. Juanita Broaddrick (1978) Allegation: Rape

    6. Carolyn Moffet (1979) Allegation: Sexual assault

    7. Elizabeth Ward (1983) Allegation: Unclear

    8. Sally Perdue (1983) Allegation: Unclear

    9. Paula Jones (1991) Allegation: Sexual harassment

    10. Sandra Allen James (1991) Allegation: Sexual assault

    11. Christy Zercher (1992) Allegation: Sexual assault

    12. Kathleen Willey (1993) Allegation: Sexual assault

  12. I have no idea if Stormy Daniels is telltale by the truth. She might not even know. Who knows if the dress still hasn’t been drycleaned and if it has DNA.

    Saying Trump had affairs in the past is like declaring he made offensive Tweets. Yes, we know.

    For some reason, most presidents, including JFK, cheated on their wives. It’s a complaint I have about those in office.

    They couldn’t throw out the Electoral College. They proved Hillary worked with Russian spies instead of Trump. They couldn’t prove mental illness. They couldn’t prove physical illness.

    So now they are trying to prove a past affair and somehow throw him out because of that.

    These are repeated attempts at a coup from people who will not accept the results of a lawful election.

    It is too much to hope that people merely ensure the balance of power and keep the government as lawful as possible. As long as Trump holds office there will be repeated attempts to throw him, and then Pence our of office. They want a Single Party State, Media, and Education System and are willing to do anything to get it.

  13. William Shakespeare wrote a book called Much Ado About Nothing. I think we need a new novel about Trump named Much Ado About Pay For Play.
    I personally advocate pay for play or prostitution. Both directions. When I was a bar tender at the Lodge of the Four Seasons many years ago I was known as G Man. Women would pay me to massage the G Spot. Not many men, then or now, know how to do that.
    Why is it so nasty out there in the public that Donald might have paid that good looking woman for a roll in the hay? Jeso. Be honest out there guys. You all would do so unless you are bent.

  14. Speaking of sex. . .

    UMich presentation appears to ‘dignify and redeem’ sex between men and boys

    A presentation at the University of Michigan will deal with the subject of pederasty, or sex between men and boys, with the professor giving the speech apparently hoping to “dignify and redeem” what he calls “intergenerational modern pederastic relationships.”

    The workshop, scheduled for today and titled “Pederastic Kinship: Deidealizing Queer Studies,” will be presented by Kadji Amin, assistant professor of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies at Emory University, according to an event listing on the University of Michigan’s website.

    Hosted by the university’s Doing Queer Studies Now “interdisciplinary workshop,” it will explore the “kinship form” of “modern pederasty.”

    There’s more at the link. Also, FWIW, Evergreen’s enrollment is down about 20%.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. How is that relevant here??? It seems to fit a pattern common among Trump supporters. When faced with unpleasant news (regarding Trump) supporters aggressively move to change the subject to perceived Liberal excesses. It reflects a feeble tendency to view every single issue as part of the broad Culture Wars.

      1. But isn’t everything sort of part of the broad Culture Wars??? Now I admit, a President possibly having sex with a porn star is probably going to hit the front page regardless of the party. But most other stuff about Trump really is the Left’s hatred of him for cultural reasons. Did you see the Racist Xenophobe Test I posted here the other day?

        Tell me that if Trump had made the Scandinavian remark, that he wouldn’t have been called a racisssst! for it.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

  15. A former Playboy model came out today with more stories about Trump. I don’t think she will be the last. But that’s OK, he has more problems then trying to keep the women silent.

    1. The Curious (and Weird) Case of Donald Trump: my apologies to Benjamin Button. As the story moves along, we are presented controversies regarding an ever younger Donald Trump. At some point he will have allegedly done something un-presidential in exiting the womb.

    1. Old news. She was vying for attention back in 2016! Which, even if true, I put in the category of:

      “I sucked his dxxx once, sooo he ought to take care of me for the rest of my life!” stories

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  16. In 2006 Stormy Daniels may or may not have had an affair with Donald Trump.
    In 2006 Stormy Daniels may or may not have had an affair with Jonathan Turley.
    In 2006 Stormy Daniels may or may not have had an affair with a lot of people. (insert your name)

    Why should this be an issue?

    1. Because:

      In 2016 Democrats were fighting for a Clinton victory.
      In 2017 Democrats were fighting for a Trump impeachment.
      In 2018, Democrats are still fighting for a Trump impeachment.

      1. In other words, politics on the left has devolved into smear campaigns rather than campaigning on the issues important to Americans. The only reason I can see for the Democrats doing this for such a long time is that they are devoid of issues that the American public supports.

        This is quite apparent on this legal political blog. A vast emptiness is coming from the left.

        1. Allan,
          I would say the politics of today is primarily influenced by smear campaigns and identify politics. And this is not a Democrat-only phenomenon. My opinion is the Democrats have perfected the practice and the Republicans will get there once they fully divest themselves from true conservatives.

          1. Olly, Politics always flows towards the lowest common denominator, but we have always had a strain of politicians to enlighten us. Perhaps Trump is that type of politician.

            We need principles that we follow. I have not seen principled arguments from the left and that leads them to policy suggestions that tend to create more problems than they solve.

  17. 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.

    In other words, this is likely to generate more publicity for Daniels but not necessarily new evidence.

    So Turley, you did the mental gymnastics and despite your own conclusion decided this was newsworthy? It appears you have something in common with Stormy Daniels and it involves attention-seeking…

Comments are closed.