Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Bayhawks

Stormy Daniels scandal thread

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, flapgreen said:

Ah looks like more of the same lunacy in the political forum. Hitler reference in the first post I see. See you guys in a few months. 

Since your major interest is "Looking at my package" I am sure you will have plenty to keep you occupied until you return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

I don't.

Melania knew what she signed up for when she hitched her wagon to the Trump Train.

Maybe not the mushroom and yeti thing. That said, I don't feel sorry for her at all because the bolded

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, flapgreen said:

Ah looks like more of the same lunacy in the political forum. Hitler reference in the first post I see. See you guys in a few months. 

I always look forward to you stopping by and posting this! :thumbup:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, flapgreen said:

Ah looks like more of the same lunacy in the political forum. Hitler reference in the first post I see. See you guys in a few months. 

Looking forward to it. In the meanwhile, enjoy watching Trubisky each week! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2018 at 10:24 AM, JuniorGong said:

No mention of Trump trying to pass off Stormy the night after they banged to Ben Roethlisberger? She turned Ben down and was terrified of him

https://www.abc15.com/news/national/stormy-daniels-says-she-was-terrified-of-steelers-qb-ben-roethlisberger

 

"'He stood outside, not leaving,'" Daniels said of Roethlisberger. "Every now and again he'd knock, rapping his knuckles in a line low along the door. 'Come onnnn,' he repeated in a singsong voice. 'I won't tell.'"

 

Yeesh.  :unsure: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ned said:
On 24/9/2018 at 4:24 PM, JuniorGong said:

No mention of Trump trying to pass off Stormy the night after they banged to Ben Roethlisberger? She turned Ben down and was terrified of him

https://www.abc15.com/news/national/stormy-daniels-says-she-was-terrified-of-steelers-qb-ben-roethlisberger

 

"'He stood outside, not leaving,'" Daniels said of Roethlisberger. "Every now and again he'd knock, rapping his knuckles in a line low along the door. 'Come onnnn,' he repeated in a singsong voice. 'I won't tell.'"

Not surprised that Rapesliberger is creepy....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FBI is Now Investigating the Shady Vice Squad That Cuffed Stormy Daniels

Quote

On Thursday, Columbus police chief Kim Jacobs announced the FBI’s Public Corruption Task Force is probing her agency’s vice section for criminal activity in light of “high-profile incidents,” including Daniels’ motorboating bust and the fatal shooting of a 23-year-old woman during a prostitution sting operation.

“Recent high-profile incidents have brought forward a variety of allegations against the Vice section via social media postings and other sources,” a press release from the Columbus Division of Police stated. “Persons who have knowledge of criminal activity by members of the Columbus Police Vice personnel are asked to call a tip line set up by the FBI to investigate these claims.”

In July, cops cuffed Daniels under an arcane state law that bans nude or semi-nude performers from touching patrons who aren’t family members. The Columbus city attorney dropped charges against Daniels the next day, saying no crime was committed.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump Directed Legal Action to Enforce Stormy Daniels’s Hush Agreement

President in February instructed Michael Cohen to seek restraining order against adult-film actress, people familiar with the effort say

- WSJ

President Trump personally directed an effort in February to stop Stormy Daniels from publicly describing an alleged sexual encounter with Mr. Trump, people familiar with the events say.

In a phone call, Mr. Trump instructed his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to seek a restraining order against the former adult-film actress, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, through a confidential arbitration proceeding, one of the people said. Messrs. Trump and Cohen had learned shortly before that Ms. Clifford was considering giving a media interview about her alleged relationship with Mr. Trump, despite having signed an October 2016 nondisclosure agreement.

Mr. Trump told Mr. Cohen to coordinate the legal response with Eric Trump, one of the president’s sons, and another outside lawyer who had represented Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization in other matters, the people said. Eric Trump, who is running the company with his brother in Mr. Trump’s absence, then tasked a Trump Organization staff attorney in California with signing off on the arbitration paperwork, these people said.

Direct involvement of the president and his son in the effort to silence Ms. Clifford hasn’t previously been reported. The accounts of that effort recently provided to The Wall Street Journal suggest that the president’s ties to his company continued into this year and contradict public statements made at the time by the Trump Organization, the White House and Mr. Cohen.

The White House referred a request for comment to the president’s outside counsel. Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, declined to comment. A person close to the situation said Eric Trump had acted as the president’s son and not in his role as a company executive. The Trump Organization declined to comment. Lanny Davis, a lawyer for Mr. Cohen, declined to comment.

In March, the Trump Organization denied any role in the arbitration, saying its lawyer assisted in her “individual capacity.” At the same time, the White House issued blanket denials when asked about a hush payment to Ms. Clifford and directed questions to Mr. Cohen, who had called the deal a private transaction between himself and the former adult-film star. Mr. Trump has denied any sexual encounter with Ms. Clifford.

The Journal revealed on Jan. 12 that Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Clifford $130,000 before the 2016 presidential election to keep silent about the alleged sexual encounter. In a phone call about a month later—as Ms. Clifford made plans to tell her story despite the nondisclosure agreement—Mr. Trump told Mr. Cohen to enforce the contract in arbitration and indicated he would pay legal costs. “I’ll take care of everything,” the president said, one of the people familiar with the conversation said.

Mr. Cohen had a second phone conversation with Mr. Trump about the arbitration days later in the Manhattan office of Lawrence Rosen, the outside lawyer, that person said.

At the time of the conversations, the White House and Mr. Trump were dealing with the mass shooting in Parkland, Fla., and a new round of criminal charges filed by special counsel Robert Mueller against 13 Russians accused of meddling in the 2016 election.

Jill Martin, a Trump Organization lawyer, was listed as counsel on the arbitration paperwork filed in Orange County, Calif., on Feb. 22. Five days later, an arbitrator privately issued a restraining order against Ms. Clifford, who ignored it and proceeded with her plans to publicly discuss the alleged affair.

Ms. Martin was asked to sign off on the arbitration documents by Mr. Rosen, who told her the request came from Eric Trump, according to the people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Rosen’s firm had prepared the documents for the arbitration proceeding, but an attorney licensed in California—one of the venues stipulated for resolution of any dispute under the contract—had to sign off on them while Mr. Rosen’s application to participate in the matter as an out-of-state lawyer was pending, Mr. Rosen said in an interview this week.

When the Journal contacted Ms. Martin and the Trump Organization in March about her involvement in the arbitration, she sought out Eric Trump for advice on how to respond, according to the people.

zation’s chief legal officer, these people said. The statement said Ms. Martin had facilitated the filing of the arbitration “in her individual capacity” and that “the company has had no involvement in the matter.”

Ms. Martin didn’t respond to a request for comment.

On March 6, Ms. Clifford sued Mr. Trump and Essential Consultants LLC, the company Mr. Cohen used to pay her, in Los Angeles County Superior Court. She asked a judge to invalidate the nondisclosure agreement, saying it was contrary to public policy and unenforceable because Mr. Trump hadn’t signed the document.

The complaint alleged that it “strains credulity to conclude that Mr. Cohen is acting on his own” to enforce the nondisclosure agreement in arbitration “without the express approval and knowledge of his client Mr. Trump.”

At a briefing at the White House the next day, press secretary Sarah Sanders was asked whether Mr. Trump approved the payment to Ms. Clifford. Mr. Trump has “made very well clear that none of these allegations are true,” Ms. Sanders said, adding that the “case has already been won in arbitration and anything beyond that I would refer you to the president’s outside counsel.”

An interview with Ms. Clifford aired on CBS’s “60 Minutes” on March 25, drawing more than 21 million viewers. She described some details of her alleged encounter with Mr. Trump in 2006 and said she signed the nondisclosure agreement with Mr. Cohen in October 2016 out of fear for the safety of her family.

In a May 3 tweet, Mr. Trump said the nondisclosure agreement with Ms. Clifford was “used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair.”

In August, Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to felony violations of election laws in connection with the payments to Ms. Clifford and a former Playboy model, Karen McDougal, who also says she had an affair with Mr. Trump that he denies.

Mr. Cohen, whose sentencing is scheduled for December, said during his plea hearing in Manhattan federal court that Mr. Trump directed him to silence Ms. Clifford and coordinate a hush payment to Ms. McDougal “for the principal purpose of influencing the election” in 2016.

Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, said after the plea that Mr. Cohen lacked credibility and that the government’s charges against Mr. Cohen contained no allegations of wrongdoing by the president.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2018 at 9:24 AM, JuniorGong said:

No mention of Trump trying to pass off Stormy the night after they banged to Ben Roethlisberger? She turned Ben down and was terrified of him

https://www.abc15.com/news/national/stormy-daniels-says-she-was-terrified-of-steelers-qb-ben-roethlisberger

 

Quote

 

She says she sat next to Roethlisberger and chatted with him about winning the Super Bowl, telling him that she was in Detroit when his team won. She mentioned the strip club where she'd performed, and Roethlisberger acknowledged that the club was "really nice."

Roethlisberger eventually asked, "Do you come to Pittsburgh a lot?" Daniels wrote, before the two exchanged phone numbers.

 

Seems legit.  That's about the amount of game I'd imagine Big Ben would have.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Trump Directed Legal Action to Enforce Stormy Daniels’s Hush Agreement

President in February instructed Michael Cohen to seek restraining order against adult-film actress, people familiar with the effort say

- WSJ

  Reveal hidden contents

 

President Trump personally directed an effort in February to stop Stormy Daniels from publicly describing an alleged sexual encounter with Mr. Trump, people familiar with the events say.

In a phone call, Mr. Trump instructed his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to seek a restraining order against the former adult-film actress, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, through a confidential arbitration proceeding, one of the people said. Messrs. Trump and Cohen had learned shortly before that Ms. Clifford was considering giving a media interview about her alleged relationship with Mr. Trump, despite having signed an October 2016 nondisclosure agreement.

Mr. Trump told Mr. Cohen to coordinate the legal response with Eric Trump, one of the president’s sons, and another outside lawyer who had represented Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization in other matters, the people said. Eric Trump, who is running the company with his brother in Mr. Trump’s absence, then tasked a Trump Organization staff attorney in California with signing off on the arbitration paperwork, these people said.

Direct involvement of the president and his son in the effort to silence Ms. Clifford hasn’t previously been reported. The accounts of that effort recently provided to The Wall Street Journal suggest that the president’s ties to his company continued into this year and contradict public statements made at the time by the Trump Organization, the White House and Mr. Cohen.

The White House referred a request for comment to the president’s outside counsel. Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, declined to comment. A person close to the situation said Eric Trump had acted as the president’s son and not in his role as a company executive. The Trump Organization declined to comment. Lanny Davis, a lawyer for Mr. Cohen, declined to comment.

In March, the Trump Organization denied any role in the arbitration, saying its lawyer assisted in her “individual capacity.” At the same time, the White House issued blanket denials when asked about a hush payment to Ms. Clifford and directed questions to Mr. Cohen, who had called the deal a private transaction between himself and the former adult-film star. Mr. Trump has denied any sexual encounter with Ms. Clifford.

The Journal revealed on Jan. 12 that Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Clifford $130,000 before the 2016 presidential election to keep silent about the alleged sexual encounter. In a phone call about a month later—as Ms. Clifford made plans to tell her story despite the nondisclosure agreement—Mr. Trump told Mr. Cohen to enforce the contract in arbitration and indicated he would pay legal costs. “I’ll take care of everything,” the president said, one of the people familiar with the conversation said.

Mr. Cohen had a second phone conversation with Mr. Trump about the arbitration days later in the Manhattan office of Lawrence Rosen, the outside lawyer, that person said.

At the time of the conversations, the White House and Mr. Trump were dealing with the mass shooting in Parkland, Fla., and a new round of criminal charges filed by special counsel Robert Mueller against 13 Russians accused of meddling in the 2016 election.

Jill Martin, a Trump Organization lawyer, was listed as counsel on the arbitration paperwork filed in Orange County, Calif., on Feb. 22. Five days later, an arbitrator privately issued a restraining order against Ms. Clifford, who ignored it and proceeded with her plans to publicly discuss the alleged affair.

Ms. Martin was asked to sign off on the arbitration documents by Mr. Rosen, who told her the request came from Eric Trump, according to the people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Rosen’s firm had prepared the documents for the arbitration proceeding, but an attorney licensed in California—one of the venues stipulated for resolution of any dispute under the contract—had to sign off on them while Mr. Rosen’s application to participate in the matter as an out-of-state lawyer was pending, Mr. Rosen said in an interview this week.

When the Journal contacted Ms. Martin and the Trump Organization in March about her involvement in the arbitration, she sought out Eric Trump for advice on how to respond, according to the people.

zation’s chief legal officer, these people said. The statement said Ms. Martin had facilitated the filing of the arbitration “in her individual capacity” and that “the company has had no involvement in the matter.”

Ms. Martin didn’t respond to a request for comment.

On March 6, Ms. Clifford sued Mr. Trump and Essential Consultants LLC, the company Mr. Cohen used to pay her, in Los Angeles County Superior Court. She asked a judge to invalidate the nondisclosure agreement, saying it was contrary to public policy and unenforceable because Mr. Trump hadn’t signed the document.

The complaint alleged that it “strains credulity to conclude that Mr. Cohen is acting on his own” to enforce the nondisclosure agreement in arbitration “without the express approval and knowledge of his client Mr. Trump.”

At a briefing at the White House the next day, press secretary Sarah Sanders was asked whether Mr. Trump approved the payment to Ms. Clifford. Mr. Trump has “made very well clear that none of these allegations are true,” Ms. Sanders said, adding that the “case has already been won in arbitration and anything beyond that I would refer you to the president’s outside counsel.”

An interview with Ms. Clifford aired on CBS’s “60 Minutes” on March 25, drawing more than 21 million viewers. She described some details of her alleged encounter with Mr. Trump in 2006 and said she signed the nondisclosure agreement with Mr. Cohen in October 2016 out of fear for the safety of her family.

In a May 3 tweet, Mr. Trump said the nondisclosure agreement with Ms. Clifford was “used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair.”

In August, Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to felony violations of election laws in connection with the payments to Ms. Clifford and a former Playboy model, Karen McDougal, who also says she had an affair with Mr. Trump that he denies.

Mr. Cohen, whose sentencing is scheduled for December, said during his plea hearing in Manhattan federal court that Mr. Trump directed him to silence Ms. Clifford and coordinate a hush payment to Ms. McDougal “for the principal purpose of influencing the election” in 2016.

Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, said after the plea that Mr. Cohen lacked credibility and that the government’s charges against Mr. Cohen contained no allegations of wrongdoing by the president.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

:yes:

David Frum‏ @davidfrum 4h4 hours ago

This WSJ story about Trump efforts to silence Stormy Daniels also underscores the total fiction of Trump claims to have separated himself from his businesses to avoid conflicts of interest...As if there were any doubt ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, squistion said:

:yes:

David Frum‏ @davidfrum 4h4 hours ago

This WSJ story about Trump efforts to silence Stormy Daniels also underscores the total fiction of Trump claims to have separated himself from his businesses to avoid conflicts of interest...As if there were any doubt ...

Yes, absolutely. Somewhere out there the emoluments suit moves forward as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Federal Judge dismisses Stormy's defamation suit - no word on why just yet.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/15/politics/stormy-daniels-lawsuit-dismissed/index.html

 

ETA from WaPo:

A federal judge on Monday dismissed a lawsuit from adult film actress Stormy Daniels in which she claimed that President Trump defamed her when he suggested her allegation that she was threatened to stay quiet about their relationship was a lie.

Federal District Judge S. James Otero had suggested during a late September hearing that he was skeptical of Daniels’s claim on First Amendment grounds. The ruling ordered Daniels, whose given name is Stephanie Clifford, to pay Trump’s legal fees.

“No amount of spin or commentary by Stormy Daniels or her lawyer, Mr. Avenatti, can truthfully characterize today’s ruling in any way other than total victory for President Trump and total defeat for Stormy Daniels,” Trump attorney Charles Harder said in an emailed statement.

 

 

 

Edited by Sinn Fein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

The ruling ordered Daniels, whose given name is Stephanie Clifford, to pay Trump’s legal fees.

This means it was a frivolous claim.

She *won, but due to her *attorney she will have to pay. That’s really farked up and that’s on him.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This means it was a frivolous claim.

She *won, but due to her *attorney she will have to pay. That’s really farked up and that’s on him.

Avenatti strikes again.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Avenatti‏Verified account @MichaelAvenatti

Here is the Notice of Appeal we just filed with the Ninth Circuit relating to the defamation claim against Trump. His record before the Ninth Circuit has been anything but good. #Basta

 

Also, :lmao: at anybody who thinks having a claim dismissed is going to slow down a lawyer like Avenatti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, flapgreen said:

There goes that. 

Very hard to win a defamation suit when you are a public figure (which Stormy Daniels has surely become).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2018 at 4:56 AM, Ned said:

"'He stood outside, not leaving,'" Daniels said of Roethlisberger. "Every now and again he'd knock, rapping his knuckles in a line low along the door. 'Come onnnn,' he repeated in a singsong voice. 'I won't tell.'"

 

Yeesh.  :unsure: 

:lmao: 

Like ten years ago I met a girl at a party who openly talked about her night with Roethlisberger. She had gone to Miami Ohio and Ben was a few years into the league and she decided she was gonna hook up with a pro QB when Ben showed up at a house party or something.  Her experience is apparently consistent with the common Roethlisberger story (at least the consensual ones) where he's just incredibly cheesy.  He said, when they got to the bedroom, "you're with the Big Ben; let the good times roll."  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, squistion said:

Very hard to win a defamation suit when you are a public figure (which Stormy Daniels has surely become).

I'd say it's harder to win when the alleged defaming statement was pretty obvious hyperbole. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This means it was a frivolous claim.

She *won, but due to her *attorney she will have to pay. That’s really farked up and that’s on him.

Not necessarily.  He, hopefully, advised her this lawsuit was on the proverbial boarder and that she could be subject to attorney's fees as a sanction if Trump wins by summary judgment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, flapgreen said:

There goes that. 

Not really.  There's still the NDA issue.  And, perhaps fitting, Trump "won" because a court found that a reasonable person would have concluded that his over-the-top claims are hyperbole.  In other words, a reasonable person would consider what he's saying to be nonsense. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Zow said:

I'd say it's harder to win when the alleged defaming statement was pretty obvious hyperbole. 

How many defamation suits by one public figure against another have ever succeeded? I am sure there are some, but none come to mind for me at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This means it was a frivolous claim.

She *won, but due to her *attorney she will have to pay. That’s really farked up and that’s on him.

It doesn’t necessarily mean it was frivolous. I don’t know the particulars at issue, but fees are comparatively easy to get under Anti-SLAPP provisions (as opposed to on other matters.) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zow said:

Not necessarily.  He, hopefully, advised her this lawsuit was on the proverbial boarder and that she could be subject to attorney's fees as a sanction if Trump wins by summary judgment. 

Is this Kato Kaelin?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Henry Ford said:

It doesn’t necessarily mean it was frivolous. I don’t know the particulars at issue, but fees are comparatively easy to get under Anti-SLAPP provisions (as opposed to on other matters.) 

I was probably annoyed and a beer in. However I am still annoyed and now working off coffee instead of brew. I don't think this was a Slapp suit by Stormy at Trump. It certainly could have been, but I think it was defamation and fraud and that kind of thing. But even if it was Slapp it would be her seeking the fees from Trump not the other way around. I guess I've expressed myself about this. The goal of the suit was to get Cohen/EC LLC/Trump to drop their arbitration against her and let her out of the NDA, which apparently happened but which Avenatti just couldn't say Yes to. - Maybe I'm wrong (typically am, I think I'd defer to you just about on any point, seriously... so just pontificating here) as I'd really be as happy as anyone to see Trump dragged into deposition or hearing and be forced to provide documentation and the like.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I was probably annoyed and a beer in. However I am still annoyed and now working off coffee instead of brew. I don't think this was a Slapp suit by Stormy at Trump. It certainly could have been, but I think it was defamation and fraud and that kind of thing. But even if it was Slapp it would be her seeking the fees from Trump not the other way around. I guess I've expressed myself about this. The goal of the suit was to get Cohen/EC LLC/Trump to drop their arbitration against her and let her out of the NDA, which apparently happened but which Avenatti just couldn't say Yes to. - Maybe I'm wrong (typically am, I think I'd defer to you just about on any point, seriously... so just pontificating here) as I'd really be as happy as anyone to see Trump dragged into deposition or hearing and be forced to provide documentation and the like.

No, I'm saying anti-SLAPP provisions (basically first amendment add-on laws based on political rivalry) can get a case dismissed and get fees awarded.  I'm not sure what you're talking about.  SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, which isn't something you'd argue when you file a lawsuit, it's a defense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Are you not aware that Trump originally sued Stormy Daniels to enforce the NDA?

The NDA is toast, it's been blown up. That's over as of a few weeks ago.

Did the court rule in favor of Trump today. Yes or no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

No, I'm saying anti-SLAPP provisions (basically first amendment add-on laws based on political rivalry) can get a case dismissed and get fees awarded.  I'm not sure what you're talking about.  SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, which isn't something you'd argue when you file a lawsuit, it's a defense.

Thanks, I think we're talking about the same thing. - But wouldn't that have done by Stormy the citizen to defend herself against Donald, perhaps the world's most powerful politician, as he had filed the suit to enforce the NDA and silence her? And not by Donald the world class blowhard politician seeking to defend himself against against the citizen?

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Thanks, I think we're talking about the same thing. - But wouldn't that have done by Stormy the citizen to defend herself against Donald, perhaps the world's most powerful politician, as he had filed the suit to enforce the NDA and silence her? And not by Donald the world class blowhard politician seeking to defend himself against against the citizen?

No, she sued him for defamation for his tweet that it was a con job.  He responded saying he was entitled to speak politically and hyperbolically because she was claiming he paid her off to keep her quiet so he could win the election, a political claim.  Anti-SLAPP applies because her defamation suit was (according to the judge) intended to stop him from engaging in this political discussion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

No, she sued him for defamation for his tweet that it was a con job.  He responded saying he was entitled to speak politically and hyperbolically because she was claiming he paid her off to keep her quiet so he could win the election, a political claim.  Anti-SLAPP applies because her defamation suit was (according to the judge) intended to stop him from engaging in this political discussion.

Wow, I hope that's not what happened because that would be a real abomination of the purpose of that litigation (IMO). But thanks for the insight, it's an interesting possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Wow, I hope that's not what happened because that would be a real abomination of the purpose of that litigation (IMO). But thanks for the insight, it's an interesting possibility.

I was right.  It is an Anti-SLAPP motion.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/15/politics/stormy-daniels-donald-trump-lawsuit-dismissal/index.html

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Henry Ford said:

Wow Henry, spot on. I think that's terrible. That tool is supposed to be used to protect citizens from aggressive public officials and the powerful not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Wow Henry, spot on. I think that's terrible. That tool is supposed to be used to protect citizens from aggressive public officials and the powerful not the other way around.

There are precious few fee-shifting statutes out there.  Figured it had to be this one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Wow Henry, spot on. I think that's terrible. That tool is supposed to be used to protect citizens from aggressive public officials and the powerful not the other way around.

Henry is a pretty perspicacious fellow.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

The president was caught cheating on his wife with a porn star and he's crowing about having a lawsuit tossed. 

 I swear to God man. 

Yeah but he made his fans chuckle by calling her horse face, so MAGA!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hugh Jass said:

The president of the United States just called his former porn star mistress Horseface in an official communication to the public. 

Great times, eh? This is what we want?

The onion had an impressive headline about the term horseface today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

It's the totally uninformed part of his honesty which is often the problem.

I think "forthrightness" is a better word here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

Also a better lover than me, or so my wife states.

The self wife burn. Rare move there Cotton. Let's see what happens.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Privately, Trump not only thought it was strategically smart to call Stormy Daniels 'horseface'; he workshopped the insult before tweeting, Daily Beast reports.

He trial-ballooned it among aides. One source recalled Trump saying, "that ####### horseface."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-believed-his-stormy-daniels-horseface-tweet-was-politically-brilliant?ref=home

 

 :mellow:

Did Stormy Daniels face change that much since they had their, um, tryst? If not, then he must have a thing for porn actresses with equine features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, squistion said:

Privately, Trump not only thought it was strategically smart to call Stormy Daniels 'horseface'; he workshopped the insult before tweeting, Daily Beast reports.

He trial-ballooned it among aides. One source recalled Trump saying, "that ####### horseface."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-believed-his-stormy-daniels-horseface-tweet-was-politically-brilliant?ref=home

 

 :mellow:

Did Stormy Daniels face change that much since they had their, um, tryst? If not, then he must have a thing for porn actresses with equine features.

The Onion:

Melania’s Heart Sinks After Realizing Husband Uses Pet Name ‘Horseface’ For Every Woman He *****

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NBC reporting via Maddow that Trump would have been indicted if not for his role as President.

- This makes sense, the Cohen indictment describes him effectively as a coconspirator, but it’s not exactly clear if they’re reporting a specific decision was made to not indict Trump.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy...

Following the arrest of Stormy Daniels in Columbus (which was alleged to be pretextual harassment by a right-wing officer or officers because of her feud with the President) following an internal investigation the entire Columbus Police Department Vice Unit was disbanded. 

It looks like The Shield was going on up there, and Stormy was 100% correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.