Can the democrats bring down the President with Stormy Daniels?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Its called "specific performance" in contract law - educate yourself

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
So I heard on the news tonight that Stormy Daniels has offered to pay back her money and spill the beans.. and I quote ''including any photos of text messages she has''

We've also got Maxine Waters screaming '' Stormy Daniels will 'get' Trump if Mueller investigation doesn't''

So, its pretty clear... Trump kabootzed the plastic surgery porn star with blonde hair so bimbo its got her chasing cash from the DNC and Media for a tell all story.

Trump, should just come out and say yes, he did have relations with her.
Yes, he regrets it - but it occured long ago before his political aspirations and is there fore a mute point for his Presidency

I think he'd get more male votes, look at her... she's a porn star.. who doesnt want a little thunder in their storm.

Thoughts?

She's probably cleaner than the librarian you met at the local bar.

Not my body type but would do it.

tits too big.

a reply to: TrueBrit

So you dont think that people should be held accountable to their signatures on keeping settlements out of the limelight.

Why am I not surprised that you have no sense of the rule of law.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Agit8dChop

is offering to return the $130,000 the president's personal lawyer Michael Cohen paid her in exchange for silence on the subject.

The lawyer should smack her with non performance of the NDA contract she signed. Bankrupt the greedy bit*ch

There is at least one excellent reason why that won't happen. Let's say lawyer files suit. The NDA has a liquidated damages provision that sets a specific amount she has to pay each time she talks. The law is that a liquidated damage amount must bear some reasonable relationship yo the actual damages. So you get to litigate Donny's actual damages. The first FRCP 34 demand is for Donny's past tax returns. They are relevant, and therefore discoverable, and then would be part of the public court records. Why do you think DJT has never followed through on his "I'll sue them!" threats? His ego needs those tax returns to stay hidden.

She took the money and cashed the check. At that point contract doesn't need to be signed , she admitted there is one.

Leagal zoom

Believe it or not, the old-fashioned "handshake" began as a means for two people to assure one another that neither was carrying a weapon. Over the years, this simple gesture has evolved into a contractual symbol—or a guarantee—for an oral agreement. But in an era of phone-book sized contracts, fine print and legal battles, does time-honored handshake deal still carry any weight?

The answer is yes—as long as you can prove it in court. It's interesting to note that many powerful people have engaged in handshake deals, from Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. But more than likely, these handshake deals were followed by large contracts that outlined key deal points and terms. If you are the type of person who prefers informal agreements sealed by a handshake, at the very least, have a few people on hand to witness you "shake on it." A handshake deal is always more binding when there are witnesses to the agreement. In other words, avoid agreeing to anything in a dark alley when no one else

a reply to: Painterz

So moderators aren't allowed an opinion - ok

I guess banging a porn star is an important subject in today's world..

Short answer - No.

Long answer - Everyone remembers Bill and the dress, No.

Most average Americans don't care. There's an assumption rich people usually cheat on their spouses.

They care that they got a tax cut and possibly have more job opportunities.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Educate myself like you?
You didn't answer my questions at all.
How is she greedy if she gives the money back.
Never mind the bitch part. Misogynistic view because she makes her living getting men off. Who's the dog in that scenario huh?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Educate myself like you?
You didn't answer my questions at all.
How is she greedy if she gives the money back.
Never mind the bitch part. Misogynistic view because she makes her living getting men off. Who's the dog in that scenario huh?

The news media are paying her alot of cash. And Trump can refuse to take the money back as well. Stormy is lol screwed.

Not sure how it would sink Trump - everyone already knew he was a sleaze, but that didn't stop voters for voting for him. The people that support him will vote for him regardless what he has said or done in the past. Unless there are legal implications, I doubt that this would be more than a tiny speed bump if even that, for the next campaign, no matter what texts or photos were released.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Sillyolme

Its called "specific performance" in contract law - educate yourself

There seems to be a need for a lot of education here and, being a retired law professor, I can help with that education. When a contract contains a liquidated damages clause, which this one does, the equitable remedy of specific performance is not available. And since specific performance is an equitable remedy as opposed to a legal remedy, a distinction that has its roots in 14th century English common law, Trump certainly would not want to request an equitable remedy since there is a well recognized special defense - that of "unclean hands." That means if you seek equity, you must not be guilty of inequity. Litigating in equity would necessarily entail getting into the dirty details of everyone's actions - exactly what the P#### Grabber in Chief doesn't want. He's suing to keep that from happening. I'm surprised he filed this lawsuit. It's full of landmines for him, most resulting from the almost limitless discovery allowed in civil suits.

Trump can bring down Trump with Stormy Daniels, no outside interference needed.

It's deep state "LawFare"

They've been doing it to everybody who goes against the globalist agenda, it's very effective

The only way around it is complete all out civil across the western world

Civil war must happen now or none of us will have a nation left anyway after unlimited immigration kills national identity and erodes or individual cultures

Once the globalist lefty has achieved this they will implement the New World Orders one world government since all the patriots and nationalists will be locked up

Every popular conservative right wing journalist or speaker is under the same LawFare tactics

There is a lot of money pouring in to crush the right wing and silence them

The globalist iron curtains are dropping down and the fascists are back to violently shut us down

War is coming, bigger than we've all ever seen before

Considering all the other scandals and attempts at character assassinations against Trump, I'm going to answer the thread title with a fairly confident "no."

Trump voters elected a business-minded problem solver with a morally checkered past, we knew we weren't voting in a saint or babysitter.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Agit8dChop

is offering to return the $130,000 the president's personal lawyer Michael Cohen paid her in exchange for silence on the subject.

The lawyer should smack her with non performance of the NDA contract she signed. Bankrupt the greedy bit*ch

Well, they argue the fact that Trump didnt sign it - which means its null and void..

and that sounds fair enough to me... He deliberately didn't sign it..

Last I heard, his name is Donald J. Trump.

Let Dennison sign it.

So remind me again what the point of the Stormy Daniels story is again?

Trump isn't going to resign. Not any laws broken. Republicans already know he's definitely not squeaky clean and don't care.

Just another smear campaign so the media can keep running their 99.9999% negative coverage of the POTUS.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Campaign donation laws may have been broken. They are deciding that right now.
This won't be about morality. Everybody already knows he has the morals of an alley cat.
It is about the money.

a reply to: MajorAce

So you're claiming they shook hands.
I think they did more than shake hands. Lol.

Contracts CAN be broken.