Stormy Daniels Sues Trump Over “Hush Money” Agreement

160px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Donald_Trump_(cropped)I previously wrote about how the payments to both a former porn star and a former Playboy bunny could prove a greater threat to President Donald Trump than the still unsubstantiated collusion allegations that led to the appointment of the Special Counsel.  Now, one of those woman is formally in court after Stormy Daniels (AKA Stephanie Clifford) filed an action against President Trump.  I have previously criticized counsel for both Trump and Daniels for bizarre actions in this controversy and this lawsuit is no exception.  The lawsuit introduces new facts including the allegation that President Trump’s lawyer used a fake name for the President, David Dennison, as part of this effort to pay what the complaint calls “hush money.”  After differing accounts by Daniels, she has not only stated that she did have a year long affair (something Trump’s counsel has denied) but stated it in a court filing as opposed to a tabloid newspaper.

In the lawsuit, Clifford says that she began an affair after meeting him at Lake Tahoe.  Daniels’ 2011 interview was never litigated as defamation because it was never published. It could have been litigated as slander but Trump’s counsel succeeded in deterring the magazine with a threat of a defamation lawsuit (despite the problematic elements of such a case).  The statute of limitations on defamation in New York and California is one year.  However, if she were say that the interview’s representations were true, that would constitute a new act of defamation if the representations are untrue.

Cohen conduct in this matter has been bizarre and highly questionable.  As discussed earlier, Cohen created a shield company and anonymous identity to pay off Daniels has stated that the money was his, not Trump’s or the campaign’s. In an interview with NBC, Michael Cohen, said “Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly.”  He has also informed the Federal Election Commission that this was his money and thus not an illegal “in kind” political contribution. As a personal payment, Cohen insisted that it “was not a campaign contribution or a campaign expenditure by anyone.”

Cohen told CNN “Just because something isn’t true doesn’t mean that it can’t cause you harm or damage. I will always protect Mr. Trump.”

Cohen’s incredibly generous payment for Trump does not resolve the legal questions.  If Cohen was receiving money from the campaign or Trump, the payment could be viewed as little more than a pretense or shielding tactic.  Cohen curiously set up a corporate structure and used an assumed name to carry out the transaction.  The use of personal funds added yet another wall between Daniels and Trump.  The question will likely be asked if Cohen received a padded or inflated payment to cover the “personal” payment.  Moreover, since Trump was running for president, the payment could be viewed as a form of political contribution that evaded federal election laws by the plaintiffs. That is the John Edwards problem discussed earlier.

Cohen was representing Trump in this matter, including sending threats of defamation lawsuits.  He continues to represent Trump and has even become a plaintiff himself in a defamation action.  Becoming personally involved in a case of representation through personal contributions blurs the lines of the attorney-client relationship. It also raises the aforementioned questions of indirect payments and the use of counsel to circumvent reporting laws.  There is clearly a gray zone on gifts or such personal payments. However, attorneys are barred from entering into business transactions with clients.  

Cohen however was recently alleged to have told other individuals that he did not pay Daniels in a timely manner because he was waiting to speak with Trump. He also allegedly complained that Trump had failed to reimburse him for the $130,000 payoff.  That not only contradicts his legal position but it reinforces the campaign finance allegations.  Cohen could not have handled this matter more poorly and ineptly.

The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that the agreement is null and void because Trump never signed it.  However, Daniels took signed the agreement and took the money.  Her stronger argument is that Cohen nullified the agreement by speaking publicly on the affair — another remarkably reckless decision.


Notably, Daniels says that on February 27,2018, Cohen initiated a “bogus” arbitration proceeding against her in Los Angeles.  She accused Cohen of still trying to muscle her.  Cohen is rather infamous for such threats and actions.  In complaint below states: “Put simply, considerable steps have been taken by Mr. Cohen in the last week to silence Ms. Clifford through the use of an improper and procedurally defective arbitration proceeding hidden from public view.”

As I wrote earlier, this is a real danger if the White House handles this as poorly as Cohen.  Special Counsel Mueller is already investigating Cohen’s involvement with deals in Moscow for the Trump Tower.  If he turns to the campaign finance allegations, this could easily metastasize into a serious problem.


Here is the complaint: Daniels filing

218 thoughts on “Stormy Daniels Sues Trump Over “Hush Money” Agreement”

  1. There’s a story in “Politico” right now saying that a new budget agreement, to keep the government open, could get hung up on anti-abortion provisions Republicans have inserted. Republicans wants to cut off all Federal funding to Planned Parenthood and Teen Pregnancy Prevention programs. Presumably Republicans have taken this initiative with Trump’s approval.

    But as this Stormy Daniels issue illustrates, Trump has no moral authority whatsoever with regards to women’s reproductive rights. Trump was having affairs with both a porn star ‘and’ a Playboy Playmate while his wife was pregnant! No one with a straight face could seriously argue that Trump is a Christian family man. Yet Trump had the audacity to bring disgruntled Clinton plaintiffs to the second campaign debate.

    1. Last I heard, Trump denied the allegations that he had sex with Stormy.

      Unless Trump says otherwise, I will continue to believe him over somebody who will let you film her performing fellatio on camera, for money. Because, who can “trust” anything that comes out of her mouth???

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. Well Trump’s lawyer completely admits to setting up an LLC for the purposes of paying Stormy hush money. That is, in fact, what Professor Turley is addressing here. Your doubts about this matter have a disingenuous ring.

        1. Well, I can think of several reasons why, without sex being one of them. Perhaps sex was the reason, but Trump says Thee NAY! Sooo, that’s who I am believing until and unless Trump says otherwise. Not the quasi-Damsel of the Pave.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

        2. Peter, for the matter of discussion, assume you have a wife and children. Pictures were taken of you and altered to make it seem that you were having an affair with another woman. It just so happens you had a bad period of your marriage right about that time and some friends noted you with the woman which was purely incidental. She asks you for $10 or she will release the pictures.

          Note the pictures are phony but with your recent marital problems you believe it could cost you a lot of trouble and while things were figured out you might have to pay lawyers potentially tens of thousands of dollars.

          Would you pay the $10 if you felt that ended the issue?

    2. What does moral authority have to do with passing legislation? Who in congress do you believe has moral authority? Who cares whether you believe Trump is a Christian family man? Isn’t that between him and God? The fact that you don’t like our current president doesn’t mean that the taxpayers should have to be forced to continue funding a butcher mill.

      1. You’re admittingTrump has no moral authority. And in your mind that shouldn’t matter regarding an initiative motivated by religious sentiments. Your comment succinctly encompasses the glaring hypocrisy of today’s Republican party.

        1. What Trump legally does with his own money is his business. Trump is dealing with other people’s money and therefore has the moral authority to do what he was elected to do. I will quote the former Commander and Cheat, Obama, “Elections have consequences”.

          1. Opposition to abortion in the U.S. is almost entirely driven by religious leaders and their political allies. But if their principal political ally is a philandering ‘pussy grabber’ that tends to stain the whole movement. And anyone who doesn’t see that needs to have their moral compass checked.

            1. I’m not a religious leader and I oppose funding Planned Parenthood as do millions of Americans who are on all sides of the abortion issue.

              Who are you to determine how one should behave sexually as long as they are adults and are engaged in a consensual act. Next thing we will hear is support for the groups that throw gays off the roofs of buildings.

              1. Opposition to Planned Parenthood comes from “all sides of the abortion issue”..?? I never heard that one. We’re supposed to believe that pro-choice Americans are opposed to funding Planned Parenthood?? Show me a mainstream news release that supports that contention.

                1. WordPress has a lot in common with Planned Parenthood as it kills young replies before they are born.😀

                  This last time I memorized it and am reposting it with quotes hoping the WordPress abortionists do not kill it.

                  “We’re supposed to believe that pro-choice Americans are opposed to funding Planned Parenthood??”

                  Yes. Firstly federal law prohibits the funding of abortion. Therefore funding Planned Parenthood is illegal. Secondly, Planned Parenthood has been dishonest to the American people and has broken laws even encouraging others to break laws. Some of that is documented by Project Veritas on their Planned Parenthood videos.

                  For a quick understanding of what Planned Parenthood really does and doesn’t do see this video.


                  Google has made sure that the Planned Parenthood videos by Project Veritas are hidden, but you can find them yourself if you are interested. At least one of them will demonstrate Planned Parenthood breaking the law and encouraging a patient to break the law as well.

                  1. I know all about Project Veritas and their selectively edited videos. There is no one I would rather punch more than James O’Keefe. What’s more federal funds have been going to Planned Parenthood for years, if not decades. You’re telling me that funding has been ‘illegal’ and Republicans never stopped it..?? That’s amazing!

                    1. Squeeky, Peter HIll wants to punch James because the left gets violent when they don’t like what they hear. Just look at the riots Milo caused in California.

                    2. Yes, funding is illegal.

                      Everyone edits their videos which can be hours long and Project Veritas has released the unedited videos many times when there has been doubt. Most of the times the damning evidence on video is a continuous strip of what was said over a short period of time.Take a look at the videos that have the full capture of everything said by members of the NYTimes and Washington Post.

                      The words spoken don’t need much interpretation. You just don’t like what they reveal and you probably don’t even bother looking at them because you prefer listening to what CNN tells you to look at and to believe. You prefer unproven accusations as long as they are approved by CNN. That is why you think Trump colluded with Russia when it has been proven Hillary colluded with Ukraine (the Ukranian Ambassador apologized) and likely colluded with Russia. You forget everything that doesn’t meet your bias.

                    3. @Allan

                      That is what i figure, but I thought I would do Peter the courtesy of asking him. Maybe James stole his girl friend or something??? Or maybe James tagged a friend of his, or even Peter himself.

                      Squeeky Fromm
                      Girl Reporter

                    4. “That is what i figure, but I thought I would do Peter the courtesy of asking him. ”

                      I don’t think he realizes how violent the left can be. He needs to expand his reading so that he reads or sees the news not released in the MSM. I read articles from everywhere. So should he and others.

                  2. In the course of social media debates, conservatives always presume I am a viewer of CNN. For the record I don’t have cable TV. Furthermore, I think cable is a poor source of news whether it’s CNN, MSNBC or Fox. There are too many commercials to sufficiently explore issues.

                    And secondly I’ve noticed this repeated bashing of California by Trump supporters. They know California wholeheartedly rejected Trump. So somehow they think they need to hate California. It illustrates how Trump polarizes this country. Here in California we’re not bashing Texas. As conservative as Texas might be, it’s not like we’re going to feel a communal sense of hate towards Texan residents. That’s ridiculous. And so is Donald Trump.

                    1. Peter, I use CNN as a generic. When I listen to you say you don’t recognize that it is illegal for federal funds to be spent on abortions I immediately recognize that you aren’t fully informed. When you make statements that mimic CNN statements about James O’Keefe and about the release of full information but listen to snippets taken out of context you provide a picture of yourself as one that isn’t looking closely enough for the truth.

                      California isn’t the only state that is bashed. All the conservative states are bashed at one time or another either individually or as a group. The swing states have been bashed and the rest of the Democratic states have been bashed as well. What is your picture of a person from West Virginia? How about New Yorkers? What about the Palm Beaches of either coast? What about DC?

                      Right now there are certain activities taking place in California that highlight California. For those more interested in the state one looks at how California has managed its water problems and one notes that they have done so very poorly. One notes an exodus from California and a problem in balancing its budget. California is very rich based on its geography so it should do better than most states, but it is in trouble.

                      You seem like a decent guy and I appreciate your goals. Do you think my goals are much different? It’s more a matter of the means used to get there and which way is the better way.

                  3. Federal Funds have been going to Planned Parenthood for years. Planned Parenthood clinics are in the business of women’s health. Their main service is screening for cancer and sexually transmitted diseases. In that regard P P is essential to public health. No one else is offering those services on such a wide scale. This notion that have to close P P clinics everywhere is aggressively ignorant.

                    And it’s ironic that politicians who sought to destroy Obamacare seek to destroy Planned Parenthood. Should healthcare be only for executives..?? Financially it makes sense to diagnose health problems as soon as possible. And that applies to abortion. Why force women to have children that will suffer extreme abnormalities?

                    With regards to California’s fiscal health, we are currently running $6 billion SURPLUS that Governor Brown wants to put away in a ‘rainy day fund’. What is your objection to that?? This idea that California is dead broke goes back to the Great Recession. We were one of the first states to exit the recession.

                    1. “Their main service is screening for cancer and sexually transmitted diseases. In that regard P P is essential to public health.”

                      Sorry, Peter, but you are wrong. Listen to the video. I chose that one for its accuracy and the fact that it limited its information to what Planned Parenthood actually provides. How many mammograms do you think they do? Don’t call anyone ignorant until you can answer that question. Calling people ignorant when you lack the facts (presented up front) can make you look like a fool and we don’t want that.

                      “And it’s ironic that politicians who sought to destroy Obamacare seek to destroy Planned Parenthood.”

                      Obamacare was financially ruining the middle class that didn’t get subsidies or got the minimal subsidy and insurers were fleeing the system. The entire construct of Obamacare was doomed from the start and virtually every part of it that failed was predicted to fail before it was passed. You just left the contrary opinions on Obamacare out of your reading list.

                      The destruction of Planned Parenthood is not on the table in this discussion. Only their federal funding is so all your fears are misplaced. As far as the healthcare for the population Obamacare has done more harm than good and in the process injured our economy and created more unemployment. Its so-called new programs were actually based on old programs that had already failed. Obamacare made no logical sense economically or healthcare-wise.

                      Yes, the economy has picked up and California benefitted. It was able to raise taxes yet again which places a strain on those in the middle class. California has an abundance of resources so it can better withstand poor fiscal management, but it also has a lot of expensive problems brewing deep below that haven’t been appropriately managed for decades. For such a state so rich in resources those problems are surprising. I want California to do well. It is an integral part of the United States. One of the items that I have looked at in surprise concerning California is its water supplies. I know exactly what I would do with at least some of that 6 Billion.

                  4. Allan, did you just discover the abortion issue? I’m serious. You think a Project Verrita’s video is going to turn me against Planned Parenthood? I’ve been tracking this issue since 1973! It’s not new to me.

                    Planned Parenthood is a name brand in women’s health going back 90 years. They have the staff, infrastructure and expertise to death women’s health issues. One of their biggest services is dispensing birth control. From a public health perspective that one service alone makes Planned Parenthood a national treasure. By providing birth control, to low income women, Planned Parenthood saves the government untold billions in social costs. The social costs of unwanted children become criminals and vagrants.

                    Yes, Planned Parenthood provides abortions. And again, their speciality is women’s health issues. How can they ‘not’ get involved with abortion? That’s a women’s health issue!

                    But you’re concerned about the unborn? The aborted suffer a sad fate. But the fates of unwanted children are equally as sad. Kids who spend their childhoods bouncing through foster homes. High ratios of those children wind up in prison, and, or, on the street.

                    But we don’t see Republicans caring about the poor. Not with funding, that’s for sure. Yes, Obamacare was flawed; Republicans made sure!! Then they never provided any alternative. Because they couldn’t get to the right of Obamacare. Meaning they couldn’t construct a free-market system cheaper than Obamacare. And still provide actual healthcare to low income Americans.

                    So when a party unconcerned with healthcare wants to destroy the most prominent brand in women’s health, their compassion for the unborn is highly disingenuous.

                    1. No, Peter, the abortion issue is not new to me, nor am I advocating anything with regard to abortion. I just wish to defund Planned Parenthood and let it continue without federal financing. It is basically an abortion mill so the funding is illegal. If you have been tracking Planned Parenthood then you should already know it is basically an abortion mill and has been breaking state laws with impunity. Unfortunately, despite the time you have spent following Planned Parenthood you don’t recognize they don’t manage women’s issues except tangentially or where it is related to abortion. I have no objection to them prescribing birth control pills, but that is an easy task that any woman’s clinic could handle. My only objection is the federal funding they get and those things they have done that are illegal.

                      “But you’re concerned about the unborn?”

                      Again, I will tell you I am not discussing the abortion issue. I am discussing the fact that Planned Parenthood is basically an abortion mill that offers some other services and dresses itself up as a woman’s clinic. Try getting a mammogram at a Planned Parenthood office. They are rarely involved.

                      There were many alternatives to Obamacare offered by Republicans and others. You just have selective memory. ObamaCare is a disaster admittedly so by so many on the left and so many on the right. As you can see it is failing not due to the Republicans, but due to the way the law was written.

                      ” Meaning they couldn’t construct a free-market system cheaper than Obamacare.”

                      ObamaCare is neither cheap nor effective. It is the worst of both worlds. It is causing great harm to those that can barely afford the premium and then first have to start paying for their care.

        2. Government should do what’s right for the citizens regardless of their own personal beliefs. And what’s right is for the taxpayers to stop having to pay for the murder of other citizens.

      2. Sorry, hiding behind the fake dead “children” only works among the fundamentalist wackjobs. Here in the real world, we know it’s birth control, and that you, and your ilk, long for the “good ole days” when women–and their bodies–were the property of their nearest male relative. I’d say you rue the fact that you were born about 100 years too late. So sorry for your misfortune.

        this is to “Yup, me and jebidiah always sez we like em barefoot and prefer stupid” fox sierra

        1. Dumba$$,

          Have you ever sat back and reflected what all the then Liberal ideas about Abortion, and birth control have done to the country? Because now even Liberals are demanding that we let religiously conservative foreigners in to boost our sagging birth rate. Morbidly hilarious.

          Anyway, one thing that Liberals and Libertarians both have, is an addiction to theories. They are about theories the same way dope fiends are about drugs. What both also don’t do, is to sit back and ask themselves what a failure of their theory looks like.

          Here, if the idea was to have a better society, by allowing women to kill their babies, or to refuse to procreate, then wonderful! How did it work out? If the answer is an overall birth rate less than 2.2%, then the theory flops, because that amount carried into the future means you have a declining population. And your society dies. I don’t think your society improves if you kill it off.

          While we can stand a little decline, somewhere along the line, we are going to have to have an end to abortion, and to birth control on demand. Look for this to manifest in Japan sometime in the next few decades.

          This will fly right over your head, sooo this is for other people who know how to use their brains.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Assuming arguendo that your theory about declining birthrate among ALL Americans is accurate, I regret to inform you that correlation is not causation. I suggest that next you discuss the various stereotypical drawbacks often associated with Americans who don’t look like you. That’s a sure winner.

            this is to squeeKKK

        2. “birth control” Marky Mark Mark???
          Wow. I don’t often see blatant postings from creatures with black souls. You are to be pitied.

          This is to “I haven’t near run out of bigoted generalized stereotypes yet” Marky Mark Mark

          1. I have something to tell you, and it’s going to make you very sad…You see, we don’t live in a theocracy, so no matter what your preacher man has fired you up with, no matter how many fake tears are shed and candles are burned, no matter how many “contributions” the congregation is begged to provide, the Constitution prevails. Women are now in control of their own bodies, and birth control is legal. I suggest you read Roe v. Wade for some other writings from those with “black souls,” or whatever your Sunday school teacher called freedom-lovers today. So sorry for your loss.

            this is to “you know, The Handmaid’s Tale would be a sweet situation, actually” sierra

  2. I really don’t care if he paid for sex, it would be a whole different thing if he had been a Dem, the thing that bothers me is that it shows how incompetent his lawyers and Trump are.

  3. 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. Kennedy’s conduct does not excuse Trump. You need to stop listening to Limbaugh and Hannity.

      1. You are right Natacha, but the stuff about Kennedy is proven. None of the stuff about Trump is except his locker room talk that was probably rather tame compared to the Kennedy’s.

        Do you get off on the sex acts of others? I ask because it seems you are fixated on sex acts and body parts.

        1. Character matters. Even when the day glo bozo is in office.

          this is to “but, but, Obama ate puppies” allan

          1. “Character matters. ”

            Get over it, Mark. Your parents bought a condo when they should have bought a condom.

          2. Did argue about character mattering when Clinton was in office? Did you complain about the list of women who claimed, over decades and decades, to have been assaulted and raped by him? Huh? Right. Of course you didn’t. Somehow, with Clinton, character was never an issue with your kind.


  4. “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.”

    1. George: stop doing the Kellyanne Pivot. Nothing any other person on Earth has ever done excuses Trump. BTW: neither Kennedy, FDR or Clinton bragged about their ability to assault women, and all were excellent Presidents and fundamentally honest men. Trump is a fat pathological liar, who colluded with Russians to steal the election solely for the glory of the office. He’s a profound failure by any objective measure.

      1. Trump…colluded with Russians to steal the election</blockquote)

        You need to let Mueller know. He's been looking for the proof that you apparently have.

  5. “FDR and His Women”

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

  6. 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

      1. So George you’re saying we can’t possibly discuss Donald Trump’s affairs until we examine every complaint against Bill Clinton..??

        1. Why discuss them at all, other than just out of prurient interest?

      2. Those were women from the distant past. . .he was just using them, as they say, to get warmed up. . .if the tabloids are correct, Clinton has had AIDS for years. . .wouldn’t surprise me.

    1. The rest are dead. . .dying of mysterious causes. . .planes, exploding in mid-air, falling from the skies. . .botched robberies, where nothing was taken. . .suicides, with gunshots to the back of heads. . .yes. . .you left them out. . .dead women tell no lies. . .

      1. You forgot whitewater! There should be hearings, investigations! Oh, wait, uh, never mind…

        this is to “let’s talk about anything but the day glo bozo” bammie

  7. Here’s an example for those who just love DJT. There is proof of DJT abusing women, committing war crimes and flogging economic policies which harm the poor. I would say that these actions make him scum. So does this mean that I should support the IC lying against him? No, it does not.

    while I find this article amazing in that it takes place in a magazine which has often supported the govt. in grinding the people under the oligarchy’s heel, for once, there is an article which makes sense. The article lays out a situation which is analogous to the power differential between Trump and Daniels. Find it at Assange’s twitter. Assange has no reason to support DJT seeing as Trump wants Assange dead: That’s what integrity looks like.

    1. What war crimes? :Looks to me like the progressive seculars socialist liberals have that category sewn up and chained shut tight with their 607,000 to 6,000 at best lead. Bush I and II complied with the War Powers Act Obama did not and went from one war Iraq to another Afghanistan and from their to north africa and other parts of the middle east without so much as a by your leave ,much less consent of congress. all the while plahying footsie with the other side.

    2. “There is proof of DJT abusing women, committing war crimes and flogging economic policies which harm the poor.” So? where is the proof. nothing in your source fit that picture?

    3. “There is proof of DJT abusing women, committing war crimes and flogging economic policies which harm the poor.”

      That is not proof. That is evidence leading to an opinion. The evidence actually lines up in the opposite direction.

      Then again what would you know about proof when your opinion on Middle Eastern issues comes from Al Jazeera that is owned by Qatar which hosts and supports terrorists along with groups and people like Qaradawi chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (Muslim Brotherhood) who says such things like Jews “spreading corruption in the land.” “we wait for the revenge of Allah to descend upon them and, Allah willing, it will be by our own hands … count their numbers and kill them, down to the very last one.”

      You probably think you are a wonderful well-informed person, Jill, taking your talking points from those that believe in wiping out an entire people. That is disgusting.

    4. “..for once, there is an article which makes sense.” -Jill

      I see that it’s by Peter van Buren, so I’m not surprised. Thanks for posting the link, Jill.

      “Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and Hooper’s War: A Novel of WWII Japan. He tweets @WeMeantWell.”

  8. Seems like Stormy is claiming that Trump should have signed a contract to which he was not a party. That is an interesting legal theory. Then, in order to make the job of defendants easier, her counsel attaches to the Complaint the contract which expressly lists the parties, none of which is Trump. Then, to make the defense counsel’s job even easier, Stormy’s counsel attaches the side agreement which he claims identifies Trump but blacks out the name which he claims is Trump.

    1. Vince: obviously, you are not a lawyer. The lawsuit is seeking a declaratory judgment that the contract is void because Trump didn’t sign it. The side letter, which is incorporated by reference, does list his name, but it is redacted. He didn’t sign that document, either.

      Now, just for a moment, close your eyes and imagine that the one who screwed a porn star was Barak Obama, and his lawyer was Michelle Obama, He agrees to pay off the porn star, but doesn’t sign the contract, and then slanders the hell out of the porn star, calling her a liar, so she files a lawsuit asking the Court to rule that she isn’t bound by the confidentiality clause because he didn’t sign, and therefore, she’s free to tell her story. Would your feelings be different, if these were the facts?

      1. Natacha, If the contract is voided she has to return the money. There are loads of shell corporations that create contracts for individuals not even mentioned in the contract.

        But forget the contract and think of what type of person plays show and tell with other people’s lives where no one else is supposed to be involved? I’ll answer that. A lousy person. Imagine if your first boyfriend ran around telling everyone he slept with you and that you couldn’t get enough and made you out to be a slut who could never be satisfied, would you think he was a nice guy?

      2. Wow. . .you can imagine Obama screwing a female porn star? Kudos to you. You must have some imagination. I can only picture Obama screwing men, from the Village People, or men, dressed as women.

        1. Are you not too old for wet dreams? Maybe count sheep rather than focus onObama’s body, you might sleep better.

          1. Natacha was the one who asked for us to imagine Obama screwing around with some porn star. Read. Scroll up. I just responded that I could only imagine him participating in some low-budget, poorly filmed, gay porn, with other men. . .like Moochie. I was responding to a call to imagine something. . .I did.

      3. Obviously, I am a lawyer and in the 43 years I have been practicing law I have never heard of someone attempting to void a contract on the grounds that a person, not a party to the contract, failed to sign it.

        Look at it this way: You hire a builder to build you a new home. You and the builder both sign the contract. You give the builder a down payment. Then, the builder tries to void the contract on the grounds that I didn’t sign it. Pretty silly, right. Change the names and it is just as silly.

        1. Vince, I am still most definitely not a lawyer. But I read the link Turley provided to Ms. Clifford’s court filing. And it looks to me as though Ms. Clifford’s lawyer is alleging that Trump’s lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, used pseudonyms to obfuscate Trump’s role as Cohen’s client. Ms. Clifford’s lawyer further alleges that it is extremely unlikely that Cohen violated his ethical obligation to keep his client, Trump, fully informed of all material information arising out of the contract for Ms. Clifford’s silence. IOW, Cohen would have to fall on his sword in order to make good on the claim that Trump was not a party to the contract for Ms. Clifford’s silence. Cohen might just do that. But he could lose his license to practice law in the bargain.

          P. S. I still think Stormy is smarter than Cohen and Trump combined.

          1. You make a valid point except that Stormy’s lawyer redacted the parts of the side agreement that purportedly would have shown that Trump was the real party in interest. He claims that D.D. was really Trump and says here is the side agreement to prove it, but the side agreement doesn’t prove it because he redacted the relevant part of the side agreement. I don’t understand why he would do that unless the redacted portions of the side agreement do not, in fact, reveal that D.D. is Trump.

            Stormy may be too smart by half. By voiding the contract, she may be required to surrender the money she received without any guarantee that her new found fame would be profitable and may subject herself to a defamation lawsuit.

            Full disclosure: If the articles I read are correct, Stormy’s lawyer and I went to the same law school, although he is much younger than me. It is also the law school where Professor Turley teaches.

            1. Vince, I think a book deal for Ms. Clifford might garner more than $130,000. And wouldn’t Cohen have to admit the purpose of the payment in order to sue for breach of contract and get his money back?

              P. S. I would never bust your chops for failing to disclose your various “club memberships.”

              1. If Stormy voids the contract, there is no contract to breach. So, no, Cohen would not need to admit to anything other than he gave $130,000 to Stormy and it was not a gift. There are two problems with Stormy’s book deal. First, everyone is writing a book about Trump, there are a lot of trashy novels out there, and there are a finite number of readers. So, Stormy has a lot of competition. Second, any profits from her book deals could be a measure of damages in a defamation lawsuit. The more books she sells, the more she has disseminated her lies (assuming they are lies), and, consequently, the more damage she has done to Trump’s reputation.

                1. Vince, I wonder if Stormy declared the $130,000 on her tax returns?

                  Thanks for your legal opinion especially “The more books she sells, the more she has disseminated her lies ” which I never thought of.

    2. So is Daniels getting any more jobs or Oscar nominations maybe she should have tried allred.

  9. Hurrah! Finally, we get the REAL news. The ONLY news that is important. Let’s make this the “All-Stormy Daniels-All-The-Time” blog! Jon Turley’s life was meaningless before he heard of Stormy Daniels. But now that Stormy Daniels has entered his consciousness, it’s now an all-consuming passion. He has finally found his raison d’être!

    This is the most exciting, most compelling, most dramatic, and most politically significant event since the Profumo Affair in 1961 involving Christine Keeler!

    Sure, times have changed, and what was once shocking to the public is no longer so shocking. And, of course, Bill Clinton sort of set a new “standard” with his White House fellatio sessions with Monica Lewinsky and the infamous semen-infused blue dress.

    But let’s forget about that and pretend we’re in 1961 again!

    More Stormy Daniels News—All of the Time!

    As Martin Luther King put it, “Stormy Daniels at last, Stormy Daniels at last, thank God almighty we have Stormy Daniels at last!” (My quotation may not be precisely what he said, but the concept’s the important thing.)

    1. No kidding, Ralph. When I saw the headline my first thought was that this blog has become the National Enquirer. There are a lot of past presidents who should be very glad the internet wasn’t around when they were (FDR, JFK for two examples).

      1. Lucky for them that they could keep the women shut up. Strippers now have rights.

          1. Marilyn loved her Mr. President. T rump’s wives and exes can’t stand da fat old orange perv. He ain’t a good lover they just go with him for da bucks.

            1. Speaking of perverts how do yu know his abilties as a lover? Sounds like Ken’s got a bad case of jealousy and a worse case of hypocritiedups

            2. Sure. She loved being used and abused by the perverted and twisted Kennedy boys. . .passed around like a Christmas fruitcake, between them and their friends. . .ask Joe, her former husband, how much she loved her Mr. President. . .oh, yeah. . .he’s dead. . .but, if he were alive, he would tell you how much he despised, with a passion, the Kennedys. How much he detested them for the untold harm and damage that they caused to a very weak, fragile, vulnerable and unstable person, like his beloved, Marilyn. . .yeah. . .his hate for the Kennedys was well-known. . .her Mr. President treated her like dirt, and so did his buck-toothed brother, Joe.

              Good lover? You want to discuss who was a good lover? Every person, who was with JFK–and there were legions–spoke in negative terms of his skills, in bed. . .which were mechanical, at best.

        1. Yes but along with rights comes responsibilities and that’s the end of Peggy Pokea hauntus.

  10. This is garbage, something that may or may not have happened between two consenting adults. We saw the same garbage with Bill Clinton and Monica where Monica was a willing participant. Both involve personal relationships that do not belong in the public sphere.

    Nonconsensual relationships are different, but even the relationship on White House grounds is not something we need to obsess about. I criticized the Republicans for asking B.Clinton the question “Did you have sex…” as such a question is inappropriate and frankly I didn’t think a lie at that point was inappropriate because it involved a second person where no crime was committed.

    Both parties play a dangerous game in trying to entrap the leaders of the other side. This does not permit the unity the nation requires.

  11. I see by reactions here that this society has an underclass of women who one can do anything one wishes to do, including threaten them. That’s very depraved and it’s no wonder this society is so F’d up.

    Powerful people are used to using others, harming them and getting away with it. One way they get a way with these actions is that ordinary people want to be popular so they side with the powerful. This is stupidly serving the interests of people who abuse you. Trade deals, lack of workplace safety, banking bailouts–all of this comes to you in part, courtesy of worshiping the powerful and denigrating the rights of others.

    People in this nation need to stop siding with powerful wrongdoers. If you think abuse of another is fine then you can not really complain when you are abused and no one comes to help you. I have never seen more people running around without a moral compass than now. People are so hateful to those being abused by the powerful. That stuff goes around and it definitely comes around, until we act much better as human beings.

    A lot of our problems are caused by a psychotic set of oligarchs but a lot of our problems are also caused by ordinary people lacking compassion and having a will to justice in our hearts. We can’t do much about the former but we do have control over the later.

    1. Get it straight–Stormy is no victim, unless, of course, you consider voluntarily exposing yourself to hundreds of sexual partners and any myriad of sexually transmitted diseases–some if which are either incurable or deadly–with no thought of using protection, in front of cameras and for money, to be victimhood. Bottom line– she knowingly engaged in an affair with a wealthy married man. There was no love. No connection. Just the belief that she could promote herself. Get aligned with the right people. Trump, if he had an affair with this broad, did not victimize her. She did that to herself, with her choice of lifestyle, or, shall I say, death style. Stop the victimhood crap. Not every woman is a victim.

        1. Bam ban,

          An ethical person will defend a Neo-nazi’s right to speak. This isn’t any different. Whether you like Stormy Daniels or hate her isn’t the point. She has been threatened, just as right wing speakers were threatened when they tried to speak on a “left” wing campus. That is WRONG!

          I am getting sick of people’s lack of integrity about only defending people they like or agree with. Defend everyone who is being treated unfairly or your own time will come-actually, for most people in the US, rights are just illusions at this point, thanks to the very attitude you are taking. Just Stop IT!

          1. Who the f threatened that skank? Surely, it wasn’t Trump. This old bag of silicone was a distant memory to him, from a decade ago. She was the one, who managed to crawl out of the gutter, milking this thing for everything that it is worth. Trump, in true fashion, is fighting back. Fighting back against what may, or may not, be the truth. Who the f cares who this used up whore once screwed? The list would be shorter of the men with whom she has not slept. She was of age, not under any undue force or influence. . .am I supposed to be surprised that whores trade sexual favors with wealthy men? Color me shocked.

      1. “Stop the victimhood crap. Not every woman is a victim.”

        Way to go, Bam Bam.

    2. Who is “threatening” Stormy Daniels??? She signed a contract. Is it “threatening” to expect her to live up to the terms of it???

      If anybody is “threatening” anybody, it is Stormy. Who is exposing private things for money and attention.

      Frankly, I am certain by being a famous billionaire movie star, that many loose women sucked his weenie. I would not be surprised if more than few tried to get knocked up by him. Which, none of that gets any respect from me.

      For goodness sakes, Stormy performed fellatio for money on camera, let people sodomize her for money on camera, let herself be double-poled for money on camera, let men ejaculate all over her for money on camera, had sex with women for money on camera, etc etc. Sooo, obviously, Stormy has no sense of shame.

      Yet, she threatens to expose somebody that, if guilty of the act at all, probably is ashamed of ever having sexual contact with her, and she is doing it for money.

      I think you maybe need a better victim to defend.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. Wow! In your twisted brain, the bad person here is the porn star. You recite a litany of sexual acts, and then accuse her of threatening to expose the Dotard, exclaiming that she “has no sense of shame” because of the sex acts she has engaged in.

        What about the fat Dotard? Well, according to your logic, because he’s a ‘famous billionaire movie star”, he’s vulnerable to “loose women” sucking his weenie and attempting to get pregnant, so they are undeserving of respect. Fatso’s conduct is appropriate according to you, so he becomes the “victim”.

        This is all really a joke, isn’t it?

        1. It is a free country. If you respect people who take their clothes off for money, and have all kinds of raunchy sex for money while being filmed, then that is your right. If you want to think that type of person is a really wonderful person, then that is your right.

          I guess it is the filming part that causes you to have sooo much respect for them. Oh well, too bad Trump didn’t do it on film for you, so you would respect him, too.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Natacha appears to be mostly upset over the fact that President Trump is overweight. I guess it concerns her that his health might suffer.

            1. I am not so sure. I suspect Natacha is upset because she is an “upset” sort of person, who personalizes everything, especially politics. She seems to be wrapped too tight mentally, and if it wasn’t Trump and the Republicans, she would be waxing wroth about Fluoridated Water or The Armenian Genocide or whatever.

              God help her poor husband or boyfriend, if she has one.I bet she throws things if the garbage hasn’t been taken out, or the toilet seat is left up.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

            2. For Eff’s Sake,

              Nut cha cha is upset over the threat to “Affirmative Actin Privilege”, generational welfare, free food stamps, quotas, forced busing, unfair “Fair Housing” laws, discriminatory “Non-Discrimination” laws, and the rest of the reparations paid through the wholly unconstitutional redistributionist welfare state that President Donald J. Trump represents.

            3. No, FFS. Trump’s not overweight, according to him. Don’t you pay attention to his tweets? He claims he weighs a little over 200 and that he’s over 6-feet tall. Don’t you believe those statistics? His disciples believe everything he says, so your lying eyes must be deceiving you when you observe his belly hanging over his belt and his fat, wide ass when he wears golf clothes with no jacket to cover it.

              I only mention his weight because he rags women like Rosie O’Donnell for being fat. Don’t you also believe he’s not really bald, despite the recent video showing his toupee blowing up in a stiff wind. He says he’s not bald, so he must not be.

        2. How do you earn your daily bread? If it’s as a comedienne don’t give up your day job.

        3. Natacha,

          If your partner places nude pictures of you all over the Internet that were intended for the partner’s eyes only who is the bad person?

          If the partner is paid by you to stop placing those nude pictures all over the Internet, but does so anyhow, who is the bad person?

          If that exchange of funds involved a signed and sealed contract that was broken by your partner who is the bad person?

  12. “Trump had failed to reimburse him for the $130,000 payoff.”

    Add this to the long list The Donald has cheated over the years.

  13. Trump’s Koch cabinet and/or Koch V.P., Mike Spence, are on deck.
    The organization, “Kochs Off Campus”, is a new group that has a petition for people who believe in democracy to sign, at the site. The petition relates to a filing for information by Kochs Off Campus, directed at the University of Arizona and its Koch-funded “Freedom Center”. The Koch’s “freedom” PR is a false flag. It equates to leaving the 99% with nothing left to lose. While libertarians get money from the Kochtopus and chatter about limited government, the Koch’s finance ALEC and State Budget Solutions to undermine the elected representation process in states. (Search ALEC Exposed- Two Kentucky House Representatives introduce bill).
    ALEC’s harsher sentencing guidelines resulted in the U.S. population as the most imprisoned in the world and in other organization efforts, ALEC laws have resulted in labor receiving the lowest share of national income in recorded U.S. history.

    1. I’m continually amazed. . .who are you? Rain Man? Do you walk around muttering that you are a good driver on the driveway or that it is almost time for Judge Wapner? How is it that you, some how, some way, manage to throw the Koch brothers into every, single discussion and every, single thread? I get it. We get it. You have very specific opinions about very specific things. We all do; however, there is such a thing as, relevance. How is your comment even remotely connected or relevant to the topic at hand? It isn’t, unless, of course, Stormy was doing the Koch boys, as well. This is a thread about an old, washed up porn star and her affair with an individual who scraped her off of the golf course. Unless the Koch brothers were a party to these sexual escapades, which, according to my rusty French, would make these trysts, a menage a quatre, the Koch brothers are irrelevant to this discussion.

      1. Linda’s postings are extremely weird. They seem very mechanical, and prescribed. Koch, the 99%, ALEC. That’s it. Rinse and repeat. If it were my blog I would ban her/it, due to irrelevance. But it’s not, so there we are.

        1. Amen. I would ban her for refusing to engage in meaningful discussion. Many of us have asked her many times to explain her position on something, and she just clams up and mutters crap about the Kochs or whatever. Like Bams said, autistic or something.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Ad Machina. You are too nice Squeek. Autistic is too high up the scale.

        2. “Linda’s postings are extremely weird.”

          Linda is off the wall. I keep quoting things that ALEC stands behind. If she hates ALEC then she hates those ideas. That would push her closer to Stalinism.

      2. The Stormy story is as irrelevant as it is salacious.
        The activities of people who prop up Trump/Pence and hack away at American democracy warrants coverage. Blog hosts who salve their consciences by parsing out only one underpinning of democracy, like “free speech”, while failing to explain its lack of meaning in the whole of an oligarchy, do a disservice to their readers and their nation.

        1. They want to shut us up Linda. I am a goof but you make em have to work harder.

          1. No, Ken. We want you to engage in meaningful discussion. I don’t care how stupid you are, or your positions. But you ought to be able to explain them, and discuss them. Nope. Linda just spews out phrases, and you just call people names.

            Sooo, you two are pretty much worthless as defenders of your faith. Or, maybe you are just the Perfect Defenders of Your Stupid Faith, brain-dead and unable to articulate anything other than name calling. I guess it depends on how you look at it.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

            1. “No, Ken. We want you to engage in meaningful discussion.” -Little “Girl Reporter”

              If you and your buds want a place to have a “meaningful discusssion,” there are chat rooms.

              In the comments section of a blog, you might try scrolling or ignoring. Growing up would be another good option.

              1. “If you and your buds want a place to have a “meaningful discusssion,” there are chat rooms.”

                Anonymous, I thought blogs of this nature were for meaningful discussions. We can’t all be like you.

            2. You make assumptions that are unwarranted. You assume that rational, normal, evidence-based people regularly engage in banter, discussion, or debate with hair-brained wackjobs, wingnuts, klan-lite wanabees, droolers, and mouth-breathers. I have something to tell you, and it’s going to make you very sad. You see, anyone with half a brain knows that “crazy gonna do crazy.” Thus, any type of meaningful dialogue is impossible with crazy. Rather, it’s much more productive (and amusing) to just poke at crazy through their little self-imposed cages, as facts from the real world set crazy off doing crazy. The truth is, you, and your ilk, are a vanishing minority, both in the population, and in the mindset of the body politic. The normals will just wait for you, and your ilk, to die out; taking your irrational hatred of any and all who don’t think and look like you to the next plane. So, adios, and so sorry for your loss.

              this is to squeeKKK

              1. Huh??? What is evidence based about “There are no illegal people!”

                Oh, you are right about one thing. You idiots will win. The Commies set the Useful Idiot Program in motion back in the 1930s, and they did not turn it off after the Cold war ended. Sooo, like Skynet, the Program keeps churning out people like you. Sooo, one day, we will turn into Venezuela, and you will still not get it.

                Congratulations on your victory. I hope you get to enjoy it good and hard!

                Squeeky Fromm
                Girl Reporter

                1. Straw-man arguments don’t work here. Reddit is down the hall. Next.

                  this is to squeeKKK

                  1. A map that showed the northern hemisphere with an area like Scandinavia highlighted on it might help the commenters who have maps that only show Venezuela.

                    1. “like Scandinavia ” The history of Linda’s world.

                      Boston Globe:

                      “To begin with, explains Swedish scholar Nima Sanandaji, the affluence and cultural norms upon which Scandinavia’s social-democratic policies rest are not the product of socialism. In “Scandinavian Unexceptionalism,” a penetrating new book published by the Institute of Economic Affairs, Sanandaji shows that the Nordic nations’ prosperity “developed during periods characterized by free-market policies, low or moderate taxes, and limited state involvement in the economy.”

                      For example, Sweden was a poor nation for most of the 19th century (which helps explain the great wave of Swedish emigration to the United States in the 1800s). That began to change as Stockholm, starting around 1870, turned to free-enterprise reforms. Robust capitalism replaced the formerly agrarian system, and Sweden grew rich. “Property rights, free markets, and the rule of law combined with large numbers of well-educated engineers and entrepreneurs,” Sanandaji writes. The result was an environment in which Swedes experienced “an unprecedented period of sustained and rapid economic development.” In fact, between 1870 and 1936, Sweden had the highest growth rate in the industrialized world.

                      Scandinavia’s hard-left turn didn’t come about until much later. It was in the late 1960s and early 1970s that taxes soared, welfare payments expanded, and entrepreneurship was discouraged.

                      But what emerged wasn’t heaven on earth.

                      That 1976 story in Time, for example, went on to report that Sweden found itself struggling with crime, drug addiction, welfare dependency, and a plague of red tape. Successful Swedes — most famously, Ingmar Bergman — were fleeing the country to avoid its killing taxes. “Growing numbers are plagued by a persistent, gnawing question: Is their Utopia going sour?”

                      Sweden’s world-beating growth rate dried up. In 1975, it had been the fourth-wealthiest nation on earth (as measured by GDP per capita); by 1993, it had dropped to 14th. By then, Swedes had begun to regard their experiment with socialism as, in Sanandaji’s phrase, “a colossal failure.””

                  2. Per capita GDP as a defense -a deceit so lacking in imagination. Median income would better reflect that six heirs to the Walton fortune have wealth equivalent to 40% of Americans combined.

          2. No Ken, you’re not a goof. Goofs are funny and fun. You are neither.

                  1. Allan said: “When I go to the barnyard I hear a lot of those burps and farts.”

                    You responded: “Allanonsense.”

                    That leads to the obvious question. Were you in the barnyard with Ken?

          3. Linda can’t make the opening bell and you dont rate goof. but both have no problem getting life time memvberships in the Stupid Party.

          4. Ken,
            I surmise, from the desperation, that there’s some payment schedule that applies when commenters like Squeeky and Andrew Workshop get replies. So, I prefer to refrain.
            Your comments aren’t “goofs”. The fact that they cause so much obvious annoyance to frequent Trump fans,
            makes that point.
            I’ve concluded the Russian trolls at Turley’s site are very protective of the host because, the other opportunities for internet posting of their comments are drying up.

        2. Linda:

          “Blog hosts who salve their consciences by parsing out only one underpinning of democracy, like “free speech”, while failing to explain its lack of meaning in the whole of an oligarchy, do a disservice to their readers and their nation.”


          Wow, I’m all ears to this word salad ( love me some mixed metaphors)! Please explain how free speech lacks meaning “in the whole of an oligarchy” given that this oligarchy (like every other oligarchy known to man) seems to want nothing more than an absence of free speech? This oughta be good.

          1. Free speech poses little (or negligible) danger to colonialism, when the speakers lack financial means and when they have been cowered by those in power (ALEC’s imprisonments, police brutality, Russian assassinations, etc.). It is the concentration of wealth, like that that currently exists, which has historically resulted in upheavals in the power structures.
            On occasion, frustration, reinforced by the soap boxes of free speech may provoke action. But, without the attached violence, the speech alone merely makes the oligarchs’ politicians hunker down e.g. Republicans in hiding from their constituents and drives oligarchs to buy media, like Fox.

            1. Linda: Free speech poses little (or negligible) danger to colonialism …

              General Wojciech Jaruzelski: Yeah, that Lech Wałęsa had a big mouth but not much to say.
              Robert Mugabe: Yep, riots didn’t make me resign.
              Frederik Willem de Klerk: Who they Hell is Nelson Mandela?
              George III: That’s news to me!

              1. Linda’s free speech argument forgot about party and what Stalin said.

                “Print is the sharpest and strongest weapon of our party.”

                1. Allan:
                  Now you played the dreaded Stalin card twice now and coocoo Linda’s pileum is embedded in the ceiling. See what you’ve done!

                1. Linda, they don’t own Time and I don’t even think they have a seat on the board. Bezos a Democrat, an investor in Business Insider and the richest man in the world bought and controls the Washington Post. You seem to have nothing to say about that.

                  1. He drank his own urine? Silly me, I thought that he wore those diapers for effect.

            2. My goodness. This is about the worst type of writing I have seen on this blog.

              “ALEC’s imprisonments” I’d worry more about the Stalinists.

              From ALEC:

              The American Legislative Exchange Council is proud to be a leader on criminal justice in the states. Since 2008, the ALEC task force on criminal justice, called the Justice Performance Project, has brought state legislators and stakeholders together to combat the trend of unforgiving and harsh criminal laws. ALEC members focus on new and innovative state policies that reduce prison populations, prioritize criminal justice spending and help rehabilitate and restore offenders’ lives.

              ALEC members’ work has sparked a new wave of state criminal justice reform legislation that is carefully crafted to maximize taxpayer dollars to protect the public while preventing overcriminalization and unnecessary prison stays. Thanks to the leadership of Texas State Representative Jerry Madden, in 2010 Texas passed the first criminal justice reforms that other states would soon emulate. That same year, North Carolina passed comprehensive criminal justice reform, called the Justice Reinvestment Act (JRA), which was based on several ALEC model policies. Since enacting JRA, North Carolina has closed ten prisons, enjoyed an 11 percent decrease in crime and saved $48 million in the 2014 fiscal year. Representative Madden, who became the chair of the ALEC Justice Performance Project in 2012, has since been recognized as a national leader on criminal justice issues. Thirty-one states have enacted into law evidence-based reforms inspired by ALEC model policy.

              For years, the ALEC Justice Performance Project has brought together a diverse coalition of allies that offer research and experience to achieve the shared goal of better sentencing laws. Notable members include Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM), Justice Fellowship, Right on Crime, Institute for Justice, Prison Fellowship, and Stop Child Predators, of which Stacie Rumenap is the ALEC Justice Performance Project private sector chair. ALEC also partners with organizations that have proven track records of leading criminal justice reforms. In 2012, ALEC and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hosted a summit focused on inspiring state criminal justice reform. Working with the ACLU, ALEC members successfully implemented mandatory minimum sentencing reforms around the country.

              In September of 2015, ALEC and the National Black Caucus of State Legislators (NBCSL) formed a new partnership to prioritize the prevention of overcriminalization, the reforming of mandatory minimum sentencing laws, the reduction of recidivism rates and the promotion of community-based alternatives to lengthy jail stays for non-violent offenders. ALEC and NBCSL also developed a shared statement of principles on criminal justice that will guide members’ efforts in state outreach and education.

              At the 2015 ALEC Annual Meeting in San Diego, members of the Justice Performance Project discussed a broad range of issues, including civil asset forfeiture reform, Ohio mens rea reforms, the Utah Justice Reinvestment Act, and held a conversation about forensic evidence. Members also considered model policies related to expunging records, diverting low-level drug offenders to courts instead of prison, and encouraging states to ask the federal government for flexibility when determining how to sentence a juvenile sex offender. At the upcoming December 2015 meeting, members will discuss a model policy that removes juveniles who are adjudicated delinquent from sex offender registries and a model policy that “bans the box” on state employment applications.

              ALEC members will continue to advance innovative ideas that improve lives and balance budgets. All criminal justice research and model policies are available on, and examples of work include the reports, “Criminalizing America – How Big Government Makes a Criminal of Every American” and “Recidivism Reduction: Community-Based Supervision Alternatives to Incarceration.” ALEC members look forward to developing new partnerships and relationships with all those who seek to advance criminal justice policy.

              1. Thanks Alan for making the case showing the shadow ALEC government. Readers can go to ALEC Exposed to see the truth and, the far reaching extent of the state laws drafted by industry and enacted by Republican legislators wined and dined by ALEC.

                1. ALEC has worked with all sorts of groups trying to reduce over aggressive criminalization. I provided the names and some of the dates and some of the laws. You have provided us with nothing.

                  1. “The Hidden History of ALEC and Prison Labor”, The Nation, Aug. 1, 2011, “Koch Self Interest in Criminal Justice Reform Exposed”, PR Watch, 12-16-2015.
                    BTW, the Koch’s are adding their clout to the privatization of public schools- no opportunity to screw the 99%, left behind. The Black Alliance for Education Options had $2 mil. in 2010. By 2012, they had $8.5 mil. Oligarch funders – Waltons, Bill Gates and the Bradley Foundation (a name very familiar to the Koch’s).

                    And, Turley tries to sell the idea that money isn’t the problem.

                    1. Anyone involved in the discussion to imprison wrongdoers can be accused of aiding and abetting prison labor. Even you, if you served on a jury that convicted a criminal.

                      What is wrong with prisoners working? I don’t think the prisoners have to work. That becomes a choice because it provides them additional benefits. It also provides training so that they are used to working instead of their prior criminal activities. The system isn’t perfect and can be improved. But it will never be improved with people like you that can only destroy and cannot build.

                      What ALEC is trying to do is reduce the prison population and make prison sentences more sensible and decrease the number of prisoners. You seem to have a problem with that.

              2. Oct. 3, 2016, Democracy Now, “How ALEC and the Koch’s Publicly Back Criminal Justice Reform and Privately Expand Mass Incarceration”.

                The Koch’s get their jollies from thinking that Americans have been duped.

                1. Another Soros sponsored left wing group run by Amy Goodman a hard left radical. She has been involved in a bit of scandal being first supported by certain non-profit groups which she left without compensating them for the property she took with her such as trademarks. It sounds like a little bit of thievery not uncommon in the leftist world.

                  ALEC together with the ACLU and black civil rights groups have helped to reduce prison populations. To Amy anything that isn’t 100% leftist is bad even if they are doing good. That just so happens to be your nature as well. Demonization rather than fact and proof is how you and your buddies try to change opinion. That is what the Nazis did to the Jews and other groups. It’s very effective but quite awful behavior.

              3. Another example of Koch humor- being science museum board members, while they are climate change deniers.

                1. I don’t think people deny climate change. That has been going on forever. Take note how Linda is using the term climate change as a synonym for significant and life-threatening global warming caused by humans. The reason the terms were changed was that scientists were unable to be taken seriously when they made that claim.

                  Linda only knows soundbites so she will probably find what I say to be very disturbing.

    1. Ain’t clicking but he had so much fun that he turned an encounter with a lorn star into a big time wife cheatin love affair.

      1. Ken, as I’m sure you know, the adult film industry has been testing its talent for sexually-transmitted diseases for many decades now. I surmise that Don Juan di Mar-a-Lago has specialized in having affairs with adult-film actresses for the express purpose avoiding having to pay out of his own pocket for the pre-screening tests for STDs that he needs before having an extra-marital affair with any given woman.

    1. Nah Allred has too much work representing all da ladies that T rump assaulted. She has no time left for his porno star affair girls.

      1. Not really they all split two months ago and Allreds daughter whatshername Bloom was left with a 50 some million donation and no where to use it up in DC. That was transferred to Alabama not to support the southern bimbo but to allow Allred to be paid as co-counsel and make up for a big zero on the DC case. At present she represents only …. nobody the DC plaintiffs having skipped and the attorney representing the porno slut have no desire to share and her daughter Bloom had to give the change back to the donors and Allred is left with a client with a bad reputation who flunked the truth test while Moore passed. They are trying for an out of court settlement but none of the bloom money is available ….

        All Red is learning what it’s like to work tirelessly for the people… bono. Betting is the judge in AL will toss it if not fine Allred for wasting the court’s time.

        1. Last I heard, Gloria was representing some black chicks suing Wal Mart for locking up the black hair care products behind glass, but not the white hair care products.

          Of course, with all that weave, is there any such thing as black hair care products anymore??? Anyway, apparently the black chicks shop lift that stuff like crazy.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. Squeeky, true story–

            There are various Walmart stores throughout the city in which I live. The one, closest to me–about ten minutes away–is located in a predominantly black area of town. Forget about just having products, which are specifically aimed at a black clientele, behind locked cases. . .the ENTIRE beauty supply section–skin care products and makeup–is situated in its own enclosed area. Yep. That’s right. You need to walk into an enclosed area, specifically closed off, from the rest of the store, with its own entrance and cashier, to view and buy all beauty related products. You must check out, at the entrance to said enclosure, any products gleaned from that space before you can leave and re-enter the rest of the Walmart store. I asked one of the managers why, when the store was remodeled, did it choose to place the beauty products in its own space, with an entrance and a cash register, and the answer was predictable–there was so much pilfering. . .so much theft. . .so much shrinkage. . .that the only way to combat these issues was to lock the customers, in an enclosed space, with cameras every couple of feet, where they would be monitored and contained.

            The Walmart, located around 20 minutes from my home, which appears to cater to a mostly white clientele, even after the store’s recent remodeling, has no such contained area around its beauty products.

            1. People like to make the charge of discrimination, but why would a company discriminate against its own customers? It is this nutso reflex reaction of the left that has created a culture that is going amiss. I am talking about the entire American culture not just one segment.

              If we wish to correct the problems in our culture we have to rid ourselves of the leftist ideas of “fairness”. That doesn’t mean we stop providing for the needy etc. It only means we do it the right way.

            2. The really bad thing to me in all this, is that people are supposed to pretend that Black women, as a group, are not a pack of thieves and shoplifters. Tommy Sotomayor, a black guy I listen to a lot, says that he was taught by his black female family members that stealing from white people was OK. He had an interview the other day with Judge Joe Brown, of TV fame, who said that beyond actual criminality, blacks have a “lawlessness” problem. Like a dog, who isn’t a bad dog, but who will steal food from your plate when you aren’t looking. An opportunistic type of mindset.

              Wal Mart will eventually be pressured into denying that Reality exists.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

  14. Why should she try to declare the agreement null and void when she is already violating it??? Just an aging whore trying to get one last good bit money before she becomes too old to do it for money, anymore. Unless someone is into geriatric sex or something.

    Why doesn’t she just write a book called, I Sucked Trump’s Weenie!, or something like that??? I wouldn’t buy it, but some people are interested in stuff like that.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. agreed in full better off with a ghost writer but that’s as bad as schumer giving a talk on anti semitism when he can’t support his own country trying to finish up the war his party started. But then there is such a thing as political whores too.

    2. OK, Dum Dum: she’s seeking a declaratory judgment that she isn’t bound by the agreement because he didn’t sign it. Therefore, they can’t enforce the confidentiality clause against her, or sue her for telling her side of the story.

      This is all really a hoax, isn’t it? Come on, admit it. No one is really that stupid or pathetic. This is just like Dear Abby being the victim of an ongoing prank by a fraternity years ago, writing letters pretending to be a victim of some sort.

      1. Just because HER copy isn’t signed, doesn’t mean that “DD”‘s copy isn’t signed. I see this as a fishing expedition.

        Frankly, if she got the money, then she should be bound by the terms of the agreement. That would be called an “implied contract” in most states. Whether “DD” signed or not.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. But still, you don’t see anything wrong with the Dotard buying off a porn star? How about his lawyer? Two days in a row now we’ve seen evidence of the rank incompetence of people he hires.

          1. His money. He can spend it how he wants. $130,000 is chump change to him. Do I see anything wrong with being with a porn star? Yes. I would not go out of my way to hang out with them. But I wouldn’t do Beauty Pageants either. Or live in Florida.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

          2. If the porn star was paid for sex she was compensated and shouldn’t be blackmailing anyone. If she received money to keep her mouth shut about a consensual act whether it occurred or not, she should keep her mouth shut.

            This is blackmail and if she steps over the line it could even be criminal. If it isn’t she could be sued for damages and potentially bankrupted in the process. She is betting that whether true or not Trump’s position prevents him from defending himself. She is a terrible person and a terrible example of womanhood.

Comments are closed.

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: