If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
Because the NDA was looking like it wasn't going to work. It was a shitty attempt at further intimidation. Just because you pay someone off doesn't mean you therefore would never also threaten them, that's not a thing
How does any of this indicate she is lying anyway? Trump paid her off for something. Even if there were no threats, are you trying to say she made up the affair
Yea, technically she is a "hooker" because porn work is paid sex, but you using that term plays into the very reason she probably initially accepted the money, because she thought nobody would believe her because she's just a "hooker"
No, she is not, and we're done using that term for her in this thread
If cours Comcast goes down, I'm phone posting at this point, but wanted to point out it's the term she herself used to describe what being paid by Trump would be in the interview she gave.
I actually don’t even know why I did it but I do remember while we were having sex, I was like, “Please don’t try to pay me.” And then I remember thinking, “But I bet if he did, it would be a lot.”
IT: This is what you were thinking during sex?
Stormy: Yeah, isn’t that horrible? But I remember thinking, “I hope he doesn’t think I’m a hooker.” Not that I have anything against hookers. I just personally have never done it
If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
Because the NDA was looking like it wasn't going to work. It was a shitty attempt at further intimidation. Just because you pay someone off doesn't mean you therefore would never also threaten them, that's not a thing
How does any of this indicate she is lying anyway? Trump paid her off for something. Even if there were no threats, are you trying to say she made up the affair
Yea, technically she is a "hooker" because porn work is paid sex, but you using that term plays into the very reason she probably initially accepted the money, because she thought nobody would believe her because she's just a "hooker"
No, she is not, and we're done using that term for her in this thread
If cours Comcast goes down, I'm phone posting at this point, but wanted to point out it's the term she herself used to describe what being paid by Trump would be in the interview she gave.
I actually don’t even know why I did it but I do remember while we were having sex, I was like, “Please don’t try to pay me.” And then I remember thinking, “But I bet if he did, it would be a lot.”
IT: This is what you were thinking during sex?
Stormy: Yeah, isn’t that horrible? But I remember thinking, “I hope he doesn’t think I’m a hooker.” Not that I have anything against hookers. I just personally have never done it
I ... no dude, she says literally the exact opposite.
I remember thinking, “I hope he doesn’t think I’m a hooker.”
is literally the opposite of thinking you are a prostitute.
Like, holy crap.
"If Trump pays me I [Daniels] would be a hooker" -> Trump pays Daniels to be quiet -> therefore, Daniels is hooker. I think that might be the logic train.
If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
Because the NDA was looking like it wasn't going to work. It was a shitty attempt at further intimidation. Just because you pay someone off doesn't mean you therefore would never also threaten them, that's not a thing
How does any of this indicate she is lying anyway? Trump paid her off for something. Even if there were no threats, are you trying to say she made up the affair
Yea, technically she is a "hooker" because porn work is paid sex, but you using that term plays into the very reason she probably initially accepted the money, because she thought nobody would believe her because she's just a "hooker"
No, she is not, and we're done using that term for her in this thread
If cours Comcast goes down, I'm phone posting at this point, but wanted to point out it's the term she herself used to describe what being paid by Trump would be in the interview she gave.
I actually don’t even know why I did it but I do remember while we were having sex, I was like, “Please don’t try to pay me.” And then I remember thinking, “But I bet if he did, it would be a lot.”
IT: This is what you were thinking during sex?
Stormy: Yeah, isn’t that horrible? But I remember thinking, “I hope he doesn’t think I’m a hooker.” Not that I have anything against hookers. I just personally have never done it
If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
Because the NDA was looking like it wasn't going to work. It was a shitty attempt at further intimidation. Just because you pay someone off doesn't mean you therefore would never also threaten them, that's not a thing
How does any of this indicate she is lying anyway? Trump paid her off for something. Even if there were no threats, are you trying to say she made up the affair
Yea, technically she is a "hooker" because porn work is paid sex, but you using that term plays into the very reason she probably initially accepted the money, because she thought nobody would believe her because she's just a "hooker"
No, she is not, and we're done using that term for her in this thread
If cours Comcast goes down, I'm phone posting at this point, but wanted to point out it's the term she herself used to describe what being paid by Trump would be in the interview she gave.
I actually don’t even know why I did it but I do remember while we were having sex, I was like, “Please don’t try to pay me.” And then I remember thinking, “But I bet if he did, it would be a lot.”
IT: This is what you were thinking during sex?
Stormy: Yeah, isn’t that horrible? But I remember thinking, “I hope he doesn’t think I’m a hooker.” Not that I have anything against hookers. I just personally have never done it
I’ve been seeing that “Michael Cohen admitted to violating laws he didn’t violate!” thing doing the rounds all morning, long before Trump tweeted about it. I haven’t looked into it yet, but I’m assuming it’s the usual sort of spin from someone on Fox News or something.
Yeah, SDNY has already stated Cohen was admitting to things they had other evidence of. It wasn't a spontaneous admission. They knew, he knew they knew, they knew he knew they knew, so he took a plea.
apparently cohen was still waffling until the SDNY said okay screw it we will bring charges next week and Cohen crumbled.
You are confusing two different women here dude. You really don't seem to have a good grasp on the situation. Karen McDougal is the one who's story was bought and buried by the Enquirer.
Cohen wasn't waffling, he was desperately hoping Trump would pardon him. But he apparently read all the shit Trump has crapped on him since he's known him and finally admitted what he always knew, Trump only cares about Trump.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
You are confusing two different women here dude. You really don't seem to have a good grasp on the situation. Karen McDougal is the one who's story was bought and buried by the Enquirer.
If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
You are confusing two different women here dude. You really don't seem to have a good grasp on the situation. Karen McDougal is the one who's story was bought and buried by the Enquirer.
Which, like your last link, does not actually say what you are claiming since the Enquirer did not "buy it to kill it" with Stormy Daniels.
Previously unreported are the allegations, made here by prosecutors, that Davidson worked with the National Enquirer to also catch and kill Daniels’ story.
They couldn't technically "kill" it, as she'd already had it published in 2011, but they were buying her silence on the matter, the same as they did with McDougal.
They couldn't technically "kill" it, as she'd already had it published in 2011, but they were buying her silence on the matter, the same as they did with McDougal.
If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
You are confusing two different women here dude. You really don't seem to have a good grasp on the situation. Karen McDougal is the one who's story was bought and buried by the Enquirer.
Which, like your last link, does not actually say what you are claiming since the Enquirer did not "buy it to kill it" with Stormy Daniels.
Previously unreported are the allegations, made here by prosecutors, that Davidson worked with the National Enquirer to also catch and kill Daniels’ story.
It's right there.
No, it's not. You said:
It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it.
This is literally false since they never bought it or killed it, as even your own link demonstrates.
The person who's story they bought and killed is Karen McDougal.
+1
Options
MaratastikJust call me Mara, please!Registered Userregular
She literally got paid for sex by Trump, then paid again to not talk about sex with Trump, I'm not sure what other definition there is for that besides prostitution.
This is incredibly insulting to sex workers. What the hell. Like, "yeah man, fuck prostitutes am I right?" Like what the fuck, dude?
I'm preeeeetty much done trying to convince you that Daniels isn't single-handedly responsible for the mess we currently find ourselves in because she's morally culpable for the criminal actions of two rich men, one of whom wanted to be President and both of whom wielded far more power than she did (and ultimately got even more).
I think it's very misdirected, and very much victim blaming, but it's clear you have decided that she is a terrible person. The rest of us can cheer for the backfiring of the mobsters' efforts to smear, slander, and silence her.
Personally? I'm on team "fuck Cohen and Trump and anybody else that manipulates vulnerable women".
If they were able to threaten her into keeping quiet they wouldn't have paid her $130k. I literally don't believe anything anyone on either side of this story is saying.
The money wasn’t there as a carrot to the threat’s stick. It was to lend legitimacy to the NDA should it come up (and it did). Nobody would believe someone with her story would sign an NDA for free, and so they paid her a (frankly ridiculously lowballed) sum to make it look as if the agreement was mutual.
Why do you need an NDA if you've successfully threatened someone into being silent though? "If you talk, we'll kill you... Also sign this binding legal document saying you won't talk about us saying we'll kill you." It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it. Are we really supposed to believe that someone who was so afraid of Trump and his lawyers before he became the most powerful man on Earth that she caved immediately and signed an NDA was somehow less afraid of him after he became President and she got a new lawyer?
You are confusing two different women here dude. You really don't seem to have a good grasp on the situation. Karen McDougal is the one who's story was bought and buried by the Enquirer.
Which, like your last link, does not actually say what you are claiming since the Enquirer did not "buy it to kill it" with Stormy Daniels.
Previously unreported are the allegations, made here by prosecutors, that Davidson worked with the National Enquirer to also catch and kill Daniels’ story.
It's right there.
No, it's not. You said:
It's already known she was shopping the story around before the Enquirer decided to buy it to kill it.
This is literally false since they never bought it or killed it, as even your own link demonstrates.
The person who's story they bought and killed is Karen McDougal.
It doesn't even fucking matter!
"Oh this person was trying to get paid for their story, that makes them worthless"
Like, what?!
Doing what's best for yourself != being a lying attention-seeker
They couldn't technically "kill" it, as she'd already had it published in 2011, but they were buying her silence on the matter, the same as they did with McDougal.
And that makes her a liar?
Nah
The comment was made by others that she only took the $131k from Cohen because she'd been vaguely threatened if she didn't.
“Cohen did not immediately execute the agreement, nor did he pay” Daniels. By October 25, Davidson told Pecker that Daniels was “close to completing a deal with another outlet to make her story public,” the feds said.
She felt so threatened by them that she was close enough to closing a deal with another publication to actually go public with the story that the CEO and editor in chief of the Enquirer freaked out and both called Cohen themselves to tell him to make the payment. Wait, make that three other publications, with corroborating sources.
At the time, Daniels was reportedly in talks to tell her account to Good Morning America and Slate. The Daily Beast was also in talks with Daniels "after three sources—including fellow porn star Alana Evans—told The Daily Beast that Daniels and Trump were involved. Daniels ultimately backed out on November 3, just five days before the 2016 election."
It's about money. It's always been about money. She shopped her story and took the biggest payout. I don't care what Daniels or Trump did, I don't care what any consenting adult does. I do care when someone thinks $131k is more important than going public with the story that in 2006 Trump was cheating on his recently-having-given-birth wife, a month before a presidential election. And then continues to keep silent for more than a year, until the story breaks from a third party about the payment, and then two months later decides to sue to be freed from the NDA because she realized oh darn, I'm the only one who can't talk about this and make money off it now, even though everyone knows.
The WSJ broke the story. Without any help from Daniels. Cohen's involvement, Davidson's, the Enquirers, none of that Daniels gave up. The payment, the campaign finance violations, none of that was in any way revealed by Daniels. All she's done is sue Coehn/Davidson/Trump to be freed from the likely illegitimate NDA, after the story became public, so she can continue making money off the story. So a tweet saying "How do you like me now!" well, I don't, because through all of this she's done nothing that wasn't self-serving.
+1
Options
RankenphilePassersby were amazedby the unusually large amounts of blood.Registered User, Moderatormod
edited August 2018
edit: nevermind, this ain't helping and it's steering off topic
Rankenphile on
0
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
Trump's supporters literally would not have given the slightest of shits about this story pre election. The dudes an admitted sexual abuser, and known philanderer. His supporters are still, as of last night, chanting lock her up without a shred of irony. They don't care how garbage of a person trump is. Stormy's story would not have mattered in 2016.
Hilariously this whole thing blowing up in the exact manner it has is like the only fuckin ray of daylight we got here.
I'm glad she took the payments... because those payments were outright crimes committed by the president of the United states. Crimes he attempted to cover up by committing more crimes with presidential power.
She's managed to take a nothing story about Donald Trump having extramarital sex and turned it into a literal federal case against the president.
If it weren't for her getting totally fucked over by a conspiracy of rich and powerful assholes we'd not have the president credibly accused of crimes right now.
She did not at all cause our problems here. Like you can't in any reasonable sense blame this shit on her at all... literally no one thought Donald had a chance of winning. You know how I know that? People literally called me crazy for insisting he not only had a shot, but was the likely victor. Folks operating under that assumption, that trump had no chance, were less than dime a dozen in 2016, and criticizing folks for operating under that assumption is Monday morning quarter backing at best... outright disdainful of most of this board at worst.
Daniels story, on its own, is inconsequential to trump. Another extramarital affair for the pile. Trump committing multiple crimes to cover it all up... that's a fuckin hum dinger right there.
matt, her kid's life and well-being was also threatened.
She claimed she was threatened in 2011, if she did the In Touch interview. Which she still did, she gave the interview after being threatened, told In Touch her story. Nothing happened to her and it wasn't published at the time because Cohen threatened to sue the magazine so they chickened out, ultimately publishing it in March this year. There've been no other claims of threats or intimidation since then.
Also would be an october surprise which would have helped. Just because the pussy-grab tape didn't matter in the long term doesn't mean it didn't have an effect in the short term. That's the kind of thing that killed Clinton.
+1
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
I still can't parse how deeply complicit/ morally bankrupt the GOP has to be that they haven't started impeachment peoceedings.
The thing is, if Cohen and Trump hadn't tried to intimidate and bully and pay Daniels off, it would either have been a complete non-story or hardly a blip on anyone's radar. I mean, of course Trump fucking cheated on his wife. We all knew that.
But these guys have exactly one well they can go to, and that's the schoolyard bully. They don't like feeling like somebody else has power over them, so they have to make them feel worthless and hopeless. That's why you see conservative pundits constantly screaming about what she does for a living, and that's why they peeled off some bills in her direction while also threatening her and her kids. It's all about power to them.
And some people, even Democrats, are buying the narrative of a woman who was just after the money. It ticks me off. Nobody forced Trump and Cohen to threaten her or pay her a measly sum of hush money. Nobody put a gun to the attorney's heads and made Cohen work together with Stormy's attorney -- who was supposed to be looking after her client's interests -- to get her to shut up by any means necessary. And no one forced conservatives to drag Daniels' name through the mud because of her job so that some incompetent ruffians could discredit her after the King Ruffian manipulated her and everything around her for his own self-interest.
This whole shituation is Trump and Cohen's doing. They could have left well enough alone but decided to be misogynistic mobsters and now they're paying the price for it. I don't give a damn if Stormy gets paid in the process. If she does, good for her, she deserves it after what they put her through.
Also would be an october surprise which would have helped. Just because the pussy-grab tape didn't matter in the long term doesn't mean it didn't have an effect in the short term. That's the kind of thing that killed Clinton.
As a reminder, the wikileaks of Podesta's email was immediately after pussy-grab
+5
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
I agree, but I would hope him openly cooperating and corroborating will carry more weight than just the evidence on own.
I think its more relevant because, like Avenatti's grandstanding, this is dragging it all into the limelight. Until voters can be convinced to turn out in enough numbers to return control of parts of our government, none of this will ultimately amount to anything.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
The thing that can't be forgotten is that Cohen was a financial chair with the GOP while he was breaking campaign finance violations. So the whole party should swing with him.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I agree, but I would hope him openly cooperating and corroborating will carry more weight than just the evidence on own.
I think its more relevant because, like Avenatti's grandstanding, this is dragging it all into the limelight. Until voters can be convinced to turn out in enough numbers to return control of parts of our government, none of this will ultimately amount to anything.
Yeah I think (some) Democrats have weirdly convinced themselves that theater doesn't matter, but it actually really really does. Cohen standing up and openly flipping on Trump matters, even if he has nothing to offer the actual investigation that they don't already possess. Mueller fucking nailed Trump's personal fixer so hard that he had to stand in front of a judge and say, "I did it, and so did he". It's a really big deal.
I agree, but I would hope him openly cooperating and corroborating will carry more weight than just the evidence on own.
I think its more relevant because, like Avenatti's grandstanding, this is dragging it all into the limelight. Until voters can be convinced to turn out in enough numbers to return control of parts of our government, none of this will ultimately amount to anything.
Yeah I think (some) Democrats have weirdly convinced themselves that theater doesn't matter, but it actually really really does. Cohen standing up and openly flipping on Trump matters, even if he has nothing to offer the actual investigation that they don't already possess. Mueller fucking nailed Trump's personal fixer so hard that he had to stand in front of a judge and say, "I did it, and so did he". It's a really big deal.
The theater is critical, we will win IF and only IF we can tell a story which is desirable enough and convincing enough that peoples desire for salacious and cruel gossip overwhelms their party loyalty. "Trump cheats on wife days after their son was born, his jailbird lawyer sings about the full story of his cheating, corruption and perversion!" is a big part of that.
The President gave an interview to Fox News and MSNBC just aired a clip where he says he totally did NOT know about the payments until long after it had happened, despite the audio recording being released where Cohen is on the phone with the President talking about how he's going to arrange the payments.
The President gave an interview to Fox News and MSNBC just aired a clip where he says he totally did NOT know about the payments until long after it had happened, despite the audio recording being released where Cohen is on the phone with the President talking about how he's going to arrange the payments.
So this should go swimmingly.
Wait, are you telling me that Trump is a liar?
Nothing makes sense anymore!
(Seriously though, how do you reimburse somebody shortly after they pay off your mistress and then claim you didn't know until "long after"? I know it feels like it's been decades since he was elected but fuck's sake)
+1
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
Congress interviews him, spends the whole time asking about Taxi medallions, and other shady, non-Trump stuff that he's done, to reduce his credibility.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Yeah Lanny Davis is just flat out bullshitting at this point. If Cohen had half the shit he claims he'd have gotten a better deal than he did. But as someone said above it is useful in giving the press a lead and a story to run.
Lanny Davis is a crook and a liar with zero ethics. Ignoring him is for the best.
Posts
It says, pretty explicitly, in the quote you linked that she does not think of herself as a hooker.
"If Trump pays me I [Daniels] would be a hooker" -> Trump pays Daniels to be quiet -> therefore, Daniels is hooker. I think that might be the logic train.
I don't care, don't use it or other derogatory terms for women here.
Thanks for that btw.
I know people that have worked in the sex industry.... They are real people with real lives, dreams, and goals.
apparently cohen was still waffling until the SDNY said okay screw it we will bring charges next week and Cohen crumbled.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/national-enquirer-david-pecker-dylan-howard-schemed-with-michael-cohen-to-silence-stormy-daniels-prosecutors-say
So do I, and that's why I don't use the phrase "sex industry".
They are not machinery, raw materials being processed into some finished form, etc.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Which, like your last link, does not actually say what you are claiming since the Enquirer did not "buy it to kill it" with Stormy Daniels.
It's right there.
And that makes her a liar?
Nah
No, it's not. You said: This is literally false since they never bought it or killed it, as even your own link demonstrates.
The person who's story they bought and killed is Karen McDougal.
This is incredibly insulting to sex workers. What the hell. Like, "yeah man, fuck prostitutes am I right?" Like what the fuck, dude?
I think it's very misdirected, and very much victim blaming, but it's clear you have decided that she is a terrible person. The rest of us can cheer for the backfiring of the mobsters' efforts to smear, slander, and silence her.
Personally? I'm on team "fuck Cohen and Trump and anybody else that manipulates vulnerable women".
It doesn't even fucking matter!
"Oh this person was trying to get paid for their story, that makes them worthless"
Like, what?!
Doing what's best for yourself != being a lying attention-seeker
The comment was made by others that she only took the $131k from Cohen because she'd been vaguely threatened if she didn't.
She felt so threatened by them that she was close enough to closing a deal with another publication to actually go public with the story that the CEO and editor in chief of the Enquirer freaked out and both called Cohen themselves to tell him to make the payment. Wait, make that three other publications, with corroborating sources.
It's about money. It's always been about money. She shopped her story and took the biggest payout. I don't care what Daniels or Trump did, I don't care what any consenting adult does. I do care when someone thinks $131k is more important than going public with the story that in 2006 Trump was cheating on his recently-having-given-birth wife, a month before a presidential election. And then continues to keep silent for more than a year, until the story breaks from a third party about the payment, and then two months later decides to sue to be freed from the NDA because she realized oh darn, I'm the only one who can't talk about this and make money off it now, even though everyone knows.
The WSJ broke the story. Without any help from Daniels. Cohen's involvement, Davidson's, the Enquirers, none of that Daniels gave up. The payment, the campaign finance violations, none of that was in any way revealed by Daniels. All she's done is sue Coehn/Davidson/Trump to be freed from the likely illegitimate NDA, after the story became public, so she can continue making money off the story. So a tweet saying "How do you like me now!" well, I don't, because through all of this she's done nothing that wasn't self-serving.
I agree, but I would hope him openly cooperating and corroborating will carry more weight than just the evidence on own.
Hilariously this whole thing blowing up in the exact manner it has is like the only fuckin ray of daylight we got here.
I'm glad she took the payments... because those payments were outright crimes committed by the president of the United states. Crimes he attempted to cover up by committing more crimes with presidential power.
She's managed to take a nothing story about Donald Trump having extramarital sex and turned it into a literal federal case against the president.
If it weren't for her getting totally fucked over by a conspiracy of rich and powerful assholes we'd not have the president credibly accused of crimes right now.
She did not at all cause our problems here. Like you can't in any reasonable sense blame this shit on her at all... literally no one thought Donald had a chance of winning. You know how I know that? People literally called me crazy for insisting he not only had a shot, but was the likely victor. Folks operating under that assumption, that trump had no chance, were less than dime a dozen in 2016, and criticizing folks for operating under that assumption is Monday morning quarter backing at best... outright disdainful of most of this board at worst.
Daniels story, on its own, is inconsequential to trump. Another extramarital affair for the pile. Trump committing multiple crimes to cover it all up... that's a fuckin hum dinger right there.
She claimed she was threatened in 2011, if she did the In Touch interview. Which she still did, she gave the interview after being threatened, told In Touch her story. Nothing happened to her and it wasn't published at the time because Cohen threatened to sue the magazine so they chickened out, ultimately publishing it in March this year. There've been no other claims of threats or intimidation since then.
Also would be an october surprise which would have helped. Just because the pussy-grab tape didn't matter in the long term doesn't mean it didn't have an effect in the short term. That's the kind of thing that killed Clinton.
But these guys have exactly one well they can go to, and that's the schoolyard bully. They don't like feeling like somebody else has power over them, so they have to make them feel worthless and hopeless. That's why you see conservative pundits constantly screaming about what she does for a living, and that's why they peeled off some bills in her direction while also threatening her and her kids. It's all about power to them.
And some people, even Democrats, are buying the narrative of a woman who was just after the money. It ticks me off. Nobody forced Trump and Cohen to threaten her or pay her a measly sum of hush money. Nobody put a gun to the attorney's heads and made Cohen work together with Stormy's attorney -- who was supposed to be looking after her client's interests -- to get her to shut up by any means necessary. And no one forced conservatives to drag Daniels' name through the mud because of her job so that some incompetent ruffians could discredit her after the King Ruffian manipulated her and everything around her for his own self-interest.
This whole shituation is Trump and Cohen's doing. They could have left well enough alone but decided to be misogynistic mobsters and now they're paying the price for it. I don't give a damn if Stormy gets paid in the process. If she does, good for her, she deserves it after what they put her through.
Edit: lol I was too slow typing this out, @Sleep
The last six Republican presidents have been deeply corrupt or pardoned same, so pretty complicit.
As a reminder, the wikileaks of Podesta's email was immediately after pussy-grab
I think its more relevant because, like Avenatti's grandstanding, this is dragging it all into the limelight. Until voters can be convinced to turn out in enough numbers to return control of parts of our government, none of this will ultimately amount to anything.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
pleasepaypreacher.net
Yeah I think (some) Democrats have weirdly convinced themselves that theater doesn't matter, but it actually really really does. Cohen standing up and openly flipping on Trump matters, even if he has nothing to offer the actual investigation that they don't already possess. Mueller fucking nailed Trump's personal fixer so hard that he had to stand in front of a judge and say, "I did it, and so did he". It's a really big deal.
The theater is critical, we will win IF and only IF we can tell a story which is desirable enough and convincing enough that peoples desire for salacious and cruel gossip overwhelms their party loyalty. "Trump cheats on wife days after their son was born, his jailbird lawyer sings about the full story of his cheating, corruption and perversion!" is a big part of that.
So this should go swimmingly.
Wait, are you telling me that Trump is a liar?
Nothing makes sense anymore!
(Seriously though, how do you reimburse somebody shortly after they pay off your mistress and then claim you didn't know until "long after"? I know it feels like it's been decades since he was elected but fuck's sake)
Cohen's lawyer is saying that Cohen is willing to testify before Congress without immunity:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/22/politics/lanny-davis-michael-cohen-testify-no-immunity-cnntv/index.html
Willing to bet Congress says "no thanks"
Congress interviews him, spends the whole time asking about Taxi medallions, and other shady, non-Trump stuff that he's done, to reduce his credibility.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
Lanny Davis is a crook and a liar with zero ethics. Ignoring him is for the best.