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.
Well that's simply not good faith discussion at this point then.
Requiring Daniels to be a saint to give her the benefit of the doubt at this point is an unreasonable requirement.
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.
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.
It's possible to receive both the carrot and the stick, man.
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.
Carrot and stick. It always works better if you can use both, or at least use one and threaten to use the other.
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.
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.
She wasn’t paid to have sex with Trump, they had sex multiple times and the money was to keep quiet about 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.
Carrot and stick. It always works better if you can use both, or at least use one and threaten to use the other.
The payment means that if the story is leaked, you can rely on dumb chuds to scream that she’s a prostitute whore and don’t listen to her. That doesn’t work with a threats only model.
Maybe, but this would be the first real witness to say so, and I feel like that goes a long way, especially if he can start validating dates. However, this could also be Cohen's lawyer doing publicity.
She wasn't paid to have sex with trump. And even if she was, how would that make her a liar now?
It wasn't her responsibility to inform the American public about her affair, she's a private citizen, he was the candidate, not her. And she didn't know he paid her off with campaign money.
I don't really get what you're driving at here Matt has a problem
Maybe, but this would be the first real witness to say so, and I feel like that goes a long way, especially if he can start validating dates. However, this could also be Cohen's lawyer doing publicity.
Regardless of whether it's just Davis blowing smoke to try and get his client better press, it gets the idea in the news from a new angle so it's still useful.
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?
0
Options
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
Cohen has recordings of conversations he's had with Trump conspiring to break the law. I think he's been holding onto them to use as leverage in a deal. Now that he's taken the deal, he's giving them up. Mueller probably knows what's on the recordings but I doubt he's had access to them before now.
Perhaps the value is diminished, and he's by no means a witness beyond reproach, but having him actively helping seems like it'd be valuable. Able to link things directly, point them to key evidence, even comment on things he didn't necessarily write down or record.
He's no hero of the resistance, but I'd rather have him cave and work with the investigation than not, at least as long as they're sure it's being done in good faith.
I'm not expecting him to hinder things, but at this point I wouldn't take any chances either.
I guess my biggest hope is that he's realized how turbofucked he may well be, and is grasping at anything in reach, even if it is indeed too late to really do him the most good.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
I still don't like her. None of this is altruistic on her part. It's about money, knowing she can make even more money making noise about it now than she did keeping quiet about it. It serves a purpose, but still, fuck Stormy Daniels. If she'd told the world instead of being a $130k hooker in 2016, we wouldn't be here right now.
If she had been physically threatened as she says, I can believe she would keep quiet until she got proper legal help. But until then, her own lawyer was conspiring with Cohen to keep her mouth shut.
She was up against the fucking mob. Cut her some slack.
Also calling someone a "hooker" as an insult for taking payment for her story is fucking gross dude.
She likely took the money because like everyone she thought Trump would lose so it didn't matter and after he didn't she wanted to talk about the issue. And also it's become fairly clear she got fucking cheated by Cohen on the NDA thing, given who was supposedly representing her interests in the case.
I'm also not real confident that "Donald Trump had an affair" would have been the shocking bombshell story that finally tanked his campaign.
Cohen has recordings of conversations he's had with Trump conspiring to break the law. I think he's been holding onto them to use as leverage in a deal. Now that he's taken the deal, he's giving them up. Mueller probably knows what's on the recordings but I doubt he's had access to them before now.
Why would the Feds not already have them? Cohen is a dumb guy. They were probably seized in the first raid.
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"
Less than a day after Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight federal counts — ranging from tax evasion to campaign finance violations — Trump's longtime attorney and fixer is downplaying the possibility of a pardon. In fact, Cohen's own lawyer, Lanny Davis, says his client would outright reject one if it were granted.
"I know that Mr. Cohen would never accept a pardon from a man that he considers to be both corrupt and a dangerous person in the oval office," Davis tells NPR's Morning Edition, referring to the president later in the interview as a "criminal."
"And [Cohen] has flatly authorized me to say under no circumstances would he accept a pardon from Mr. Trump," Davis added, "who uses the pardon power in a way that no president in American history has ever used a pardon — to relieve people of guilt who committed crimes, who are political cronies of his."
Oh, come on. This is even less believable than Omarosa trying to pretend to be principled.
I still don't like her. None of this is altruistic on her part. It's about money, knowing she can make even more money making noise about it now than she did keeping quiet about it. It serves a purpose, but still, fuck Stormy Daniels. If she'd told the world instead of being a $130k hooker in 2016, we wouldn't be here right now.
If she had been physically threatened as she says, I can believe she would keep quiet until she got proper legal help. But until then, her own lawyer was conspiring with Cohen to keep her mouth shut.
She was up against the fucking mob. Cut her some slack.
Also calling someone a "hooker" as an insult for taking payment for her story is fucking gross dude.
She likely took the money because like everyone she thought Trump would lose so it didn't matter and after he didn't she wanted to talk about the issue. And also it's become fairly clear she got fucking cheated by Cohen on the NDA thing, given who was supposedly representing her interests in the case.
I'm also not real confident that "Donald Trump had an affair" would have been the shocking bombshell story that finally tanked his campaign.
You're not wrong, but it's something he probably feels insecure about. Also I think there's a tangle with his prenuptual agreement? I might be wrong about that.
She wasn't paid to have sex with trump. And even if she was, how would that make her a liar now?
It wasn't her responsibility to inform the American public about her affair, she's a private citizen, he was the candidate, not her. And she didn't know he paid her off with campaign money.
I don't really get what you're driving at here Matt has a problem
I never said it was her responsibility. I'm saying the fawning admiration for someone who could've prevented this mess in the first place but chose money over country and kept quiet until it became more financially beneficial to speak up is misplaced.
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
Lanny Davis was on CBS This Morning .. uh.. this morning.. and when asked what evidence Cohen has about all of these accusations, the first word out of his mouth were “it’s not about evidence”, so I’m not really over excited about his flipping.
I’m sure he has a lot of evidence about a lot of underhanded shit, but I’m also pretty sure he doesn’t have a drawer full of smoking guns to go with his drawer full of cell phones.
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.
They wanted her to stfu and not tell her story, so they offered to buy it for a fairly low amount of money, seemingly exploited her by using a lawyer who wasn't actually working in her interest and then apparently threatened her so she's take the deal. The NDA is what they want, the threats are just to make sure it happens. NDAs are a lot more binding then just backroom thuggery because they are legally binding and as we can see right now it can take a long time to resolve the dispute over whether they actually count. Whereas a threat you can just ignore once you think they can't get to you anymore.
Ya really might want to examine why you are being so shitty to this woman for no reason.
Less than a day after Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight federal counts — ranging from tax evasion to campaign finance violations — Trump's longtime attorney and fixer is downplaying the possibility of a pardon. In fact, Cohen's own lawyer, Lanny Davis, says his client would outright reject one if it were granted.
"I know that Mr. Cohen would never accept a pardon from a man that he considers to be both corrupt and a dangerous person in the oval office," Davis tells NPR's Morning Edition, referring to the president later in the interview as a "criminal."
"And [Cohen] has flatly authorized me to say under no circumstances would he accept a pardon from Mr. Trump," Davis added, "who uses the pardon power in a way that no president in American history has ever used a pardon — to relieve people of guilt who committed crimes, who are political cronies of his."
Oh, come on. This is even less believable than Omarosa trying to pretend to be principled.
mojojoeoA block off the park, living the dream.Registered Userregular
edited August 2018
this is being lost in the weeds but is a big reason mueller passed this Cohen matter off to NY dept (closer relation ship to state people there).
Cohen's testimony implicates trump (who can argue about what you can and cannot do to a president) but it also implicates his company, which his kids are in and run.
It’s not fawning admiration. Jesus. People can be happy that she is personally getting vindicated when going up against the Trump Family Crime Syndicate.
Whether or not you believe that she was threatened (I personally fully believe Cohen and Trump were capable of this), we know for a fact that the lawyer she had working on this NDA was closely working with Trump and Cohen to get her to shut up.
I’m not saying you need to go back and watch her whole body of work or build a shrine or some shit. Maybe just be glad that two privileged male assholes didn’t end up getting away with all the crimes they committed against her?
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.
She wasn’t paid to have sex with Trump, they had sex multiple times and the money was to keep quiet about it.
It also wouldn't matter if she DID get paid to have sex with Trump. That doesn't make her inherently less trustworthy, unless you've got a problem with women having sex.
She wasn't paid to have sex with trump. And even if she was, how would that make her a liar now?
It wasn't her responsibility to inform the American public about her affair, she's a private citizen, he was the candidate, not her. And she didn't know he paid her off with campaign money.
I don't really get what you're driving at here Matt has a problem
I never said it was her responsibility. I'm saying the fawning admiration for someone who could've prevented this mess in the first place but chose money over country and kept quiet until it became more financially beneficial to speak up is misplaced.
Fawning admiration is certainly a spin on it. Benefit of the doubt is a more honest take, but you are the one that immediately dismisses her because of her profession. Gee, I wonder why she was hesitant to say anything.
She wasn't paid to have sex with trump. And even if she was, how would that make her a liar now?
It wasn't her responsibility to inform the American public about her affair, she's a private citizen, he was the candidate, not her. And she didn't know he paid her off with campaign money.
I don't really get what you're driving at here Matt has a problem
I never said it was her responsibility. I'm saying the fawning admiration for someone who could've prevented this mess in the first place but chose money over country and kept quiet until it became more financially beneficial to speak up is misplaced.
She could have prevented this mess eh? Really?
Laying the election on her shoulders is pretty shitty and I don't think it's accurate. Victims of Trump's intimidation and silencing scheme really aren't the ones to blame here.
I still don't like her. None of this is altruistic on her part. It's about money, knowing she can make even more money making noise about it now than she did keeping quiet about it. It serves a purpose, but still, fuck Stormy Daniels. If she'd told the world instead of being a $130k hooker in 2016, we wouldn't be here right now.
If she had been physically threatened as she says, I can believe she would keep quiet until she got proper legal help. But until then, her own lawyer was conspiring with Cohen to keep her mouth shut.
She was up against the fucking mob. Cut her some slack.
Also calling someone a "hooker" as an insult for taking payment for her story is fucking gross dude.
She likely took the money because like everyone she thought Trump would lose so it didn't matter and after he didn't she wanted to talk about the issue. And also it's become fairly clear she got fucking cheated by Cohen on the NDA thing, given who was supposedly representing her interests in the case.
I'm also not real confident that "Donald Trump had an affair" would have been the shocking bombshell story that finally tanked his campaign.
Coming out in October it very well could have been enough. Trump's version of a Comey-letter basically. Remember that the pussy-grab tape tanked him for awhile. This shit can have an effect in the short-term.
The main point being, it's enough for them to be concerned about and thus work to cover up.
this is being lost in the weeds but is a big reason mueller passed this off to NY dept (closer relation ship to state people there).
Cohen's testimony implicates trump (who can argue about what you can and cannot do to a president) but it also implicates his company, which his kids are in and run.
NY state has all they need to start to bring unpardonable state criminal charges against the company and the people running it.
Mueller passed his info to SDNY office which is a federal office. It's unknown what if any info has been shared with the NY AG who would bring state charges.
this is being lost in the weeds but is a big reason mueller passed this off to NY dept (closer relation ship to state people there).
Cohen's testimony implicates trump (who can argue about what you can and cannot do to a president) but it also implicates his company, which his kids are in and run.
NY state has all they need to start to bring unpardonable state criminal charges against the company and the people running it.
Mueller passed his info to SDNY office which is a federal office. It's unknown what if any info has been shared with the NY AG who would bring state charges.
Also gonna point out that halfway through this shit storm the NY AG changed as the last one had inappropriate conduct discovered. Bonus: Trump and co apparently knew/had evidence of this conduct and the AG knew he knew. I am unaware of any such connection between new AG and Trump's folks.
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.
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?
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
It is indeed worth remembering that her legal help (who was supposed to be looking out for her best interests), was actually working with Trump the whole time.
That Keith Davidson may not have had her best interests in mind, and is a shitty lawyer, is fairly evident.
That Keith Davidson was working for Trump at the time is still an assumption.
That Keith Davidson, after brokering the deal for Woman 1, was encouraged by Cohen / The Inquirerer, to send anyone else their way is not, however, a huge leap at all, in my opinion.
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.
Posts
Well that's simply not good faith discussion at this point then.
Requiring Daniels to be a saint to give her the benefit of the doubt at this point is an unreasonable requirement.
It's possible to receive both the carrot and the stick, man.
Cohen's lawyer says he's completely flipped and will give evidence that Trump colluded with Russia
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.
He doesn’t have anything they don’t already have
Yeah the best time for Cohen to flip was prior to the raid
We are in day late and dollar short territory
She wasn’t paid to have sex with Trump, they had sex multiple times and the money was to keep quiet about it.
The payment means that if the story is leaked, you can rely on dumb chuds to scream that she’s a prostitute whore and don’t listen to her. That doesn’t work with a threats only model.
Maybe, but this would be the first real witness to say so, and I feel like that goes a long way, especially if he can start validating dates. However, this could also be Cohen's lawyer doing publicity.
It wasn't her responsibility to inform the American public about her affair, she's a private citizen, he was the candidate, not her. And she didn't know he paid her off with campaign money.
I don't really get what you're driving at here Matt has a problem
Regardless of whether it's just Davis blowing smoke to try and get his client better press, it gets the idea in the news from a new angle so it's still useful.
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?
Cohen has recordings of conversations he's had with Trump conspiring to break the law. I think he's been holding onto them to use as leverage in a deal. Now that he's taken the deal, he's giving them up. Mueller probably knows what's on the recordings but I doubt he's had access to them before now.
He's no hero of the resistance, but I'd rather have him cave and work with the investigation than not, at least as long as they're sure it's being done in good faith.
I'm not expecting him to hinder things, but at this point I wouldn't take any chances either.
I guess my biggest hope is that he's realized how turbofucked he may well be, and is grasping at anything in reach, even if it is indeed too late to really do him the most good.
I'm also not real confident that "Donald Trump had an affair" would have been the shocking bombshell story that finally tanked his campaign.
Why would the Feds not already have them? Cohen is a dumb guy. They were probably seized in the first raid.
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"
You're not wrong, but it's something he probably feels insecure about. Also I think there's a tangle with his prenuptual agreement? I might be wrong about that.
I never said it was her responsibility. I'm saying the fawning admiration for someone who could've prevented this mess in the first place but chose money over country and kept quiet until it became more financially beneficial to speak up is misplaced.
No, she is not, and we're done using that term for her in this thread
Lanny Davis was on CBS This Morning .. uh.. this morning.. and when asked what evidence Cohen has about all of these accusations, the first word out of his mouth were “it’s not about evidence”, so I’m not really over excited about his flipping.
I’m sure he has a lot of evidence about a lot of underhanded shit, but I’m also pretty sure he doesn’t have a drawer full of smoking guns to go with his drawer full of cell phones.
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.
They wanted her to stfu and not tell her story, so they offered to buy it for a fairly low amount of money, seemingly exploited her by using a lawyer who wasn't actually working in her interest and then apparently threatened her so she's take the deal. The NDA is what they want, the threats are just to make sure it happens. NDAs are a lot more binding then just backroom thuggery because they are legally binding and as we can see right now it can take a long time to resolve the dispute over whether they actually count. Whereas a threat you can just ignore once you think they can't get to you anymore.
Ya really might want to examine why you are being so shitty to this woman for no reason.
true, but I'll take it
like cohen desperately hopes mueller will
Cohen's testimony implicates trump (who can argue about what you can and cannot do to a president) but it also implicates his company, which his kids are in and run.
https://www.dcreport.org/2018/08/22/new-york-prosecutors-can-go-after-trump-now-even-if-mueller-wont/
NY state has all they need to start to bring unpardonable state criminal charges against the company and the people running it.
Whether or not you believe that she was threatened (I personally fully believe Cohen and Trump were capable of this), we know for a fact that the lawyer she had working on this NDA was closely working with Trump and Cohen to get her to shut up.
I’m not saying you need to go back and watch her whole body of work or build a shrine or some shit. Maybe just be glad that two privileged male assholes didn’t end up getting away with all the crimes they committed against her?
It also wouldn't matter if she DID get paid to have sex with Trump. That doesn't make her inherently less trustworthy, unless you've got a problem with women having sex.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Fawning admiration is certainly a spin on it. Benefit of the doubt is a more honest take, but you are the one that immediately dismisses her because of her profession. Gee, I wonder why she was hesitant to say anything.
She could have prevented this mess eh? Really?
Laying the election on her shoulders is pretty shitty and I don't think it's accurate. Victims of Trump's intimidation and silencing scheme really aren't the ones to blame here.
Coming out in October it very well could have been enough. Trump's version of a Comey-letter basically. Remember that the pussy-grab tape tanked him for awhile. This shit can have an effect in the short-term.
The main point being, it's enough for them to be concerned about and thus work to cover up.
Mueller passed his info to SDNY office which is a federal office. It's unknown what if any info has been shared with the NY AG who would bring state charges.
But also... it's you know, the crimes.
You know what? Usually when you see a picture of a someone with that expression on their face, they're the ones HOLDING the newspaper.
It's almost an M. C. Escher take on hostages.
Also gonna point out that halfway through this shit storm the NY AG changed as the last one had inappropriate conduct discovered. Bonus: Trump and co apparently knew/had evidence of this conduct and the AG knew he knew. I am unaware of any such connection between new AG and Trump's folks.
pleasepaypreacher.net
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.
https://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/stormy-daniels-full-interview-151788
That Keith Davidson was working for Trump at the time is still an assumption.
That Keith Davidson, after brokering the deal for Woman 1, was encouraged by Cohen / The Inquirerer, to send anyone else their way is not, however, a huge leap at all, in my opinion.
Edit: Davidson, not Davis..
I ... no dude, she says literally the exact opposite. is literally the opposite of thinking you are a prostitute.
Like, holy crap.