It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why "Stormy" is probably a fraud...

page: 1
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:02 PM
link   
(at least on some counts)

In typical fake-news Gloria Allred fashion, Clifford's attorney provided a mysterious picture of a DVD contained within a "safe" as an ominous warning. This is why I believe she's a fraud, and I'm intensely curious to see whether her attorney has any ties to Allred's sham operation.

The problem is, for someone trying to keep a so-called "smoking gun" safe against "all the President's men" (laughable) they sure choose a poor security container. To me, this appears like a staged scene for a photoshoot. One would have to believe the container itself was selected solely to house this disc (since it is the sole content). However, for a lawyer/client who is terribly afraid of Presidential attempts to suppress Clifford's alleged-evidence (and the unlimited reach/budget associated with said hypothetical attempts), why choose a simple fire safe (not even a security container) to house said evidence?

This is evidenced by the container's plastic backing over the locking mechanism, and the generally cheap appearance. Surely this lawyer understands that to have a hope at protecting anything, one needs a UL listed mechanical lock, with a security rated container either: TL-15, TL-30 or TL-30+6. The safe they display in the photo is not designed to defeat any security threats whatsoever and is a poor attempt at theatrics (the lone DVD in a safe)

Only problem is, it isn't realistic. It is my personal opinion this demonstrates their theatrical attempts at maintaining relevance in today's society (which was the entire point of violating the very expensive NDA to begin with).

"Hey look at me, I claim to have slept with the President! I matter now!" Meanwhile, keep on Tweeting pictures of no-security safes in some half-baked spy game tale.

twitter.com...



+4 more 
posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

She is not. She passed a lie detector test with flying colors. Her lawyer has a CD or DVD in a safe. And it's with evidence. You don't go up Against a person like trump without solid proof. I'm sure she and her lawyer have the proof.

Trump's lawyer Would not have given that kind of money for no reason, and then say it was his personal money in trump had nothing to do with it.

Her lie detector test, even showed they had unprotected sex.




edit on 23-3-2018 by kurthall because: Fix

edit on 23-3-2018 by kurthall because: Fix

edit on 23-3-2018 by kurthall because: Fix

edit on 23-3-2018 by kurthall because: Talk texting is usless



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Then why the hush money and keep quiet contract?



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Yeah I had to laugh at that.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: JBurns

Then why the hush money and keep quiet contract?
...because he can?? Because many others do so? Because this isn't unique and most important of all, who cares?



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

So Trump just goes around offering porn stars contracts to keep quiet, just because he can?

lol

Honestly, I dont care, but you made a thread about the subject and that question has been buggingme in anticipation there must people who have taken a he didnt do it posture.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:24 PM
link   

edit on 23-3-2018 by EmmanuelGoldstein because: I really doubt Donald would ever do this sort of thing. I am totally shocked. wow.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Arnie123

So Trump just goes around offering porn stars contracts to keep quiet, just because he can?

lol

Honestly, I dont care, but you made a thread about the subject and that question has been buggingme in anticipation there must people who have taken a he didnt do it posture.

Umm, yeah. People are PEOPLE.

You don't care? But enough to question it, thats caring 🤐

I didn't make the thread😯

I maintain no stance in this I don't care who he sleeps with, we don't know his inner workings with his spouse on how this rolls, yet we can rightfully question him and paying porn stars off???

Who TF cares?



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: JBurns


... who cares?


I do. What if America elected the wrong guy by mistake?
What if Trump is not who we thought he was?
I would hate to think that there could be any truth to a President of the United States recently shagging porn stars. That would really hurt America's image.
Don't know what to think now. Did we make a mistake?...




Huh



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: JBurns


Her lie detector test, even showed they had unprotected sex.





The bottom line is.....Who cares who Trump was having sex with in 2006 and why is it relevant in 2018, now that he is President?
Let’s not even go over what Presidents were nailing women other than their wives, while they were in office.
It’s a non issue. Period.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:34 PM
link   
The real issue here is that the opposition will always use sex as a way to embarrass the other guy. The hope is that "public outrage" will be enough to unseat him. That was true of Clinton, a Democrat and it is true of Trump, a Republican (kinda). The modus operand is the same. The fact is that powerful men have historically (as in a million years historical) attract females and they also like to get a little on the side if they can. The political climate today is "aghast! Aghast, I say!" at this perfectly normal behavior. But taking Clinton to task even to the point of impeachment (Yes, I know it was for "obstruction of justice" but not really) didn't work, and even with the increasingly hysterical #metoo crap, probably won't work on Trump either. It's a distraction, no matter who (D or R) is promoting it. Who gives a crap who someone is boffing and particularly when it happened in the past?



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Trump is going to end up single after this.
Then, Look out!
It's going to get gross.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

Exactly right. Here is an instance of the opposition peering through people’s private affairs, offering vast sums of cash for smut stories and Kompromat in order to ruin someone’s reputation for political gain. The actions of Daniels and her political backers is far more despicable than sleeping with a porn star.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Theirs already another lady claiming she had a 10 month relationship with Trump in 2006, her names Karen McDougal... She's a former playmate model and is even claiming Trump attempted to pay her on their first sexual encounter.

Honestly, I could personally care less... I always knew what kind of man Trump was and his obvious womanizing behaviour is the least of what offends me about the man... The only thing that would shock me, is if their aren't hundreds of these women.

But, it is a cheap source of amusement to me, to see people blindly defending him, as if he's a man of unquestionable morals & honour, or some nonsense like that.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Just a lame attempt by the Dems for revenge for Bill...
All they have now.
A 12 year old story that has absolutely no bearing on Trump being President....
Yet , they have to keep trying.
No matter how absurd and inane.




posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns



Sorry Mr. Burns.. Stormy Denials Lives...



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Hopefully trumps legal team would figure on there being multiple copies of that dvd.



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: kurthall

I'm weirded out by the continued emphasis on that tid bit. Unprotected sex. I'm wondering if there's a child.
edit on 3232018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Perhaps this is the "storm" the right wingers kept talking about, only not realizing it was a storm unlike they had imagined or hoped?



posted on Mar, 23 2018 @ 07:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: kurthall

I'm weirded out by the continued emphasis on that tid bit. Unprotected sex. I'm wondering if there's a child.


I wonder if maybe she kept a semen sample for DNA testing. How rich would that be?



new topics




 
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join