Trump sued by inappropriate content star Stormy Daniels

[Nithavela]

Adult film star Stormy Daniels filed a civil lawsuit against Donald Trump alleging that a nondisclosure agreement she signed with the president's attorney is invalid, NBC News reported on Tuesday evening.

The suit claims her agreement not to disclose a supposed intimate relationship with Trump is invalid, because the president never signed it, although his attorney Michael Cohen did.

inappropriate content star Stormy Daniels sues Donald Trump

 

[Allandavid]

And what’s this reference I see about “paternity information”...??

 

[cow451]

It’s a sad commentary that a President pays off a former mistress just before the election and it barely gets a mention on a forum like this one.

Trump, aka Dennison, probably didn’t sign the agreement thinking he could deny knowing about it. He likely knew that he could be in a sexual relationship on the Mall and his fervent followers (including many fundamentalist Christians) would stand firm. And they appear to be doing so.

 

[DaisyDay]

Here is a link to the actual complaint filed (pdf).

It includes as Exhibit 1 the original "Hush Agreement" between David Dennison and Patty Peterson. Seems like a lopsided agreement to me - she gets $130,000 for not talking (or writing or in any way alluding to DD, whether favorably, unfavorably or neutrally, whether in a diary, journal, letter, poem or piece of fiction) while he gets $1,000,000 for each mention by her or the people she told (listed on the agreement) as presumed actual damages. Funny thing is, no one even blinked at this story - so how was he "damaged" by it?


Exhibit 2 is the side letter where the pseudonyms are disclosed. The true identities of David Dennison and his lawyer are redacted but shown in the complaint.

Donald and his lawyer did not sign the agreement. Ms. Clifford and her attorney did as did "Essential Consultants LLC". Well, if he did not, she may have a winning legal argument that the agreement is not binding if all parties didn't sign - but, of course, I'm not a lawyer.

 

[cow451]

Here is a link to the actual complaint filed (pdf).

It includes as Exhibit 1 the original "Hush Agreement" between David Dennison and Patty Peterson. Seems like a lopsided agreement to me - she gets $130,000 for not talking (or writing or in any way alluding to DD, whether favorably, unfavorably or neutrally, whether in a diary, journal, letter, poem or piece of fiction) while he gets $1,000,000 for each mention by her or the people she told (listed on the agreement) as presumed actual damages. Funny thing is, no one even blinked at this story - so how was he "damaged" by it?

Wouldn’t you love to sit in on the deposition with Mr. Trump?

 

[DaisyDay]

Wouldn’t you love to sit in on the deposition with Mr. Trump?

I dunno - I think I would find it very irritating because he is a man who will say anything, who embodies truthiness.

 

[bhsmte]

Here is a link to the actual complaint filed (pdf).

It includes as Exhibit 1 the original "Hush Agreement" between David Dennison and Patty Peterson. Seems like a lopsided agreement to me - she gets $130,000 for not talking (or writing or in any way alluding to DD, whether favorably, unfavorably or neutrally, whether in a diary, journal, letter, poem or piece of fiction) while he gets $1,000,000 for each mention by her or the people she told (listed on the agreement) as presumed actual damages. Funny thing is, no one even blinked at this story - so how was he "damaged" by it?


Exhibit 2 is the side letter where the pseudonyms are disclosed. The true identities of David Dennison and his lawyer are redacted but shown in the complaint.

Donald and his lawyer did not sign the agreement. Ms. Clifford and her attorney did as did "Essential Consultants LLC". Well, if he did not, she may have a winning legal argument that the agreement is not binding if all parties didn't sign - but, of course, I'm not a lawyer.

I guess they could claim, since she signed the agreement, it is binding. And then she could say, the agreement was never fully executed (with signatures), so it isn't binding.

 

[wing2000]

It’s a sad commentary that a President pays off a former mistress just before the election and it barely gets a mention on a forum like this one.

Trump, aka Dennison, probably didn’t sign the agreement thinking he could deny knowing about it. He likely knew that he could be in a sexual relationship on the Mall and his fervent followers (including many fundamentalist Christians) would stand firm. And they appear to be doing so.

Trump could have a harem of women in the White House with out any consequence.....

 

[bhsmte]

Trump could have a harem of women in the White House with out any consequence.....

JFK all over again.

 

[cow451]

I dunno - I think I would find it very irritating because he is a man who will say anything, who embodies truthiness.

But the entertainment value!

 

[lasthero]

Here's what I don't understand about this whole thing.

I get that a lot of Trump supporters won't care about this. They either won't believe it or won't care if it's true or not. Aside from the humor that comes from the party of family values making a man like this their mascot, it's neither here nor there to me.

What I don't understand is why Trump - or Cohen, if we're really supposed to believe Trump had no knowledge of his payment - felt the need to pay her off for silence. She's not the only one to come forth with claims like this, and I can't imagine it would've been that big of a deal if it had come out before the election. To the best of my knowledge, none of the other women were paid for silence. Why is she such a big deal?

Trump's lawyer, without his knowledge or consent, paid a woman off to never talk about an event that he claims never happened, even though she had previously talked about it before. I admit, I'm not a lawyer or experienced with such things, but that sounds really weird.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

JFK all over again.

Let's hope not in every way.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Glad I never voted for a philandering serial adulterer that is being sued by a inappropriate content star.

 

[AirPo]

inappropriate content star Stormy Daniels sues Donald Trump

I guess he can scratch that off his bucket list.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

This Stormy thing was amusing for a few days. But who really cares so much. Stormy and Trump is what I see as trash. It's better for them not to brag about it. As for Trump not giving the lawyer money to pay her. Or Trump had no idea, that the lawyer paid for her silence. It's just amusing that people believe it.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I wonder what it is costing the democrat party, probably dear Hillary herself, to get sweet and innocent Stormy to come forward so she can take showers in cash.

 

[PeachyKeane]

I wonder what it is costing the democrat party, probably dear Hillary herself, to get sweet and innocent Stormy to come forward so she can take showers in cash.

You think the showers of cash weren't enough?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

You think the showers of cash weren't enough?

American pie isn't enough, where's the cake? Gimme gimme mo mo mo!

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

I wonder what it is costing the democrat party, probably dear Hillary herself, to get sweet and innocent Stormy to come forward so she can take showers in cash.

So you think Trump was too cheapskate, and should have given her more? She likely has text. Probably snapchat instant photo app. Maybe some pictures of both have intercourse? Maybe video of both having intercourse?

So the Democratic party has to bid against the Russians. Yes, it will be very expensive for a party to beat out entire Russian government.

 

[cow451]

I wonder what it is costing the democrat party, probably dear Hillary herself, to get sweet and innocent Stormy to come forward so she can take showers in cash.

Who is alleging such? The Dems have bee rather quiet about it. Daniels is probably figuring that— aside from the joy of humiliating the most powerful man in the world— she will get movie and book deals. Remember she has directed inappropriate content vids so she might even star in her own biopic.

She doesn’t need any Dem money.