Stormy Daniels offers to return $130,000 hush money to Trump in exchange for freedom to tell all


#41

Yes, but proving that it was in fact never signed and therefore has no force, is something that would take litigation unless Trump’s side concedes that it is so.

Almost all options in this affair lead to a bunch of lawyers paying down a big chunk on their mortgages.


#42

Caption:
“I can’t believe you all missed!”


#43

Its hilarious that Trump became the darling of feckless hypocritical Bible Thumpers. All their talk of “Values voting” and moralizing going right out the window at the first opportunity to get a handout from the government.


#44

No man. You just publish and then wait for the Trump people to sue you. You show up in court with an unsigned contract and you are done.
That is the better media circus and plays in to her hand more beautifully.


#45

Is she going to pay it back with interest? It appears not…


#46

She can just violate the NDA and if he sues - pull a Trump - declare bankruptcy.


#48

That Trump didn’t sign it doesn’t make it unenforceable. Trump could – but won’t – subsequently ratify it as being for his benefit. The Opening Arguments podcast, hosted by a real lawyer, explains how Trump is caught in a devilish catch-22. If Trump doesn’t affirm that he’s the pseudonymous person in the agreement, then Stormy Daniels is free to talk about her affair with Trump. If Trump does affirm that he’s the person in the agreement, then of course he’s admitting that he did engage in a settlement with her, laying waste to the repeated protestations that this never happened, this is fake news, etc.

The Opening Arguments host also points out that this isn’t just a nondisclosure agreement, it’s a settlement agreement.

And yes, moral questions aside, there’s a legal problem because paying Stormy Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet right before an election is arguably a benefit to the Trump campaign that went undisclosed.


#51

Surely a book deal for something so high profile is worth more than $130k. I’m not sure it could be a very long book, but you know sometimes I only have time to read a 64-pager these days.


#54

Definition of a National Treasure: Stormy Daniels


#56

A. Because one large group that supports him, ran on a “Family Values” platform. This is more about them than him.

B. It’s not about his sex life. It’s about breaking campaign finance laws. He can have all the sex he wants, he just can’t pay people not to talk about it in order to win elections.


#58

I’m not a lawyer, but I DID take a Business Law class in college, for what that’s worth. As I understand it, an Oral Contract is just as binding as a Written one, it’s just harder to prove that it exists. If all parties knew about this document and indicated by their actions that they intended to enter into this agreement, it could be argued that an Oral Contract existed, even with the unsigned Written Agreement. Trump’s problem is that he claims he didn’t know about the agreement, therefore Daniels’ lawyer can argue that he never intended to enter into the Contract. Trump’s problem is that if he sues Daniels for breaking the contract, he has to admit that he knew his lawyer was paying her, and he approved of it. Trump’s lawyer’s problem is that even if he did pay her without Trump’s knowledge, he broke campaign finance laws.


#59

♫Life is bare♪
♪Gloom and misery everywhere♫
♫Stormy Daniels…


#60

I have a hunch someone showed her a more handsome figure with one more zero.


#61

Nah. They’ll stop saying, “Fake news” and just shut up and cut their rhetorical losses. Never retreat, Never Surrender!


#62

Stormy’s club tour should really be called: “Grab 'em by the Balls”


#63

Seems to me the wording of an agreement such as this would state that breaking the agreement results in some huge penalty, so trying to back out of the agreement by giving back the money wouldn’t really work.


#64

Its not about policing Trump’s dick. Its about highlighting the hypocrisy of him and his party.


#65

Am I the only one who is surprised she hasn’t just randomly tweeted a measurement?


#66

I’m not sure the lack of signature means much. The fact that it was put together in California, where the lawyer was not licensed to practice law, was probably more so.

Also the president extensively addressed this issue in the statements he never made.

It’s not what he did, it’s the laws that were broken in how he covered it up and lied about it. (E.g. campaign finance laws) It’s about a pattern of behavior, which he has denied. It’s about how that pattern of behavior has made him vulnerable to extortion and blackmail.

Nah, she’s way classier than Trump is.


#67

I’d love to be a fly on her shampoo covered wall would I lie to you