• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Attorney: Stormy Daniels physically threatened

ZiprHead said:
I don't think it's going to be the big deal people are hoping it's going to be. She hasn't been very forthcoming so far and is still bound by the agreement to keep quiet, at least until the agreement has been deemed null by the courts. I'll be very happy to be mistaken though.
Click to expand...

There's no requirement to keep quiet about a threat.

However, what would surprise me is if there was no threat. Some trumpet probably would have made threats. Doesn't mean it's a serious threat.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
I don't think it's going to be the big deal people are hoping it's going to be. She hasn't been very forthcoming so far and is still bound by the agreement to keep quiet, at least until the agreement has been deemed null by the courts. I'll be very happy to be mistaken though.
Click to expand...

There's no requirement to keep quiet about a threat.

However, what would surprise me is if there was no threat. Some trumpet probably would have made threats. Doesn't mean it's a serious threat.
Click to expand...

More so, no NDA can legally cover any illegal act. If the payment to Stormy was illegal (due to being deemed a campaign contribution - since its direct and sole purpose was to benefit the campaign), then that aspect of the agreement is void. She can talk freely about receiving illegally allocated funds. Further, in the state of NY, where both the "incident" and the paperwork was signed (by only one party), Adultery is technically illegal. Therefore, everything about their encounter with each other cannot be covered by any type of NDA, since the encounter was an illegal act itself.

I am certain that the NDA will be deemed invalid. Also, I am fairly certain that the money paid to her will NOT be required by the court to be repaid, since the vehicle to accomplish that would entail the admission of more illegal activity on the part of Trump... so, possible, but highly unlikely.
 
Malintent said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
I don't think it's going to be the big deal people are hoping it's going to be. She hasn't been very forthcoming so far and is still bound by the agreement to keep quiet, at least until the agreement has been deemed null by the courts. I'll be very happy to be mistaken though.
Click to expand...

There's no requirement to keep quiet about a threat.

However, what would surprise me is if there was no threat. Some trumpet probably would have made threats. Doesn't mean it's a serious threat.
Click to expand...

More so, no NDA can legally cover any illegal act. If the payment to Stormy was illegal (due to being deemed a campaign contribution - since its direct and sole purpose was to benefit the campaign), then that aspect of the agreement is void. She can talk freely about receiving illegally allocated funds. Further, in the state of NY, where both the "incident" and the paperwork was signed (by only one party), Adultery is technically illegal. Therefore, everything about their encounter with each other cannot be covered by any type of NDA, since the encounter was an illegal act itself.

I am certain that the NDA will be deemed invalid. Also, I am fairly certain that the money paid to her will NOT be required by the court to be repaid, since the vehicle to accomplish that would entail the admission of more illegal activity on the part of Trump... so, possible, but highly unlikely.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. Lawyers can fight it out, could go either way... to me it seems natural that a lawyer can sign a contract on behalf of his client, the argument that Trump didn't sign it is very weak because Stormy took the money and acted as if the contract was in place. Based on the interview, it seems that the best shot Stormy has of a settlement is the possible existence of photos or emails that have not yet become public.

As for legality, it's not the payment itself that was illegal, it was failure to report it to SEC afterwards. Don't know about the adultery angle though.

But regardless of who wins in the courtroom, I do enjoy immensely seeing Trump squirm so much he can't even tweet about it. And the other women who are coming forward are a plus. I wish Stormy all the best.
 
Jayjay said:
Malintent said:
More so, no NDA can legally cover any illegal act. If the payment to Stormy was illegal (due to being deemed a campaign contribution - since its direct and sole purpose was to benefit the campaign), then that aspect of the agreement is void. She can talk freely about receiving illegally allocated funds. Further, in the state of NY, where both the "incident" and the paperwork was signed (by only one party), Adultery is technically illegal. Therefore, everything about their encounter with each other cannot be covered by any type of NDA, since the encounter was an illegal act itself.

I am certain that the NDA will be deemed invalid. Also, I am fairly certain that the money paid to her will NOT be required by the court to be repaid, since the vehicle to accomplish that would entail the admission of more illegal activity on the part of Trump... so, possible, but highly unlikely.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. Lawyers can fight it out, could go either way...
Click to expand...
I am completely positive. It cannot go but one general way. Sure, lawyers can "fight out" whatever any judge will tolerate to listen to... which is effectively limited to the facts of the matter and any parallel decision made. Assuming there are no completely opposite to what has been released to the public, facts, then no.
to me it seems natural that a lawyer can sign a contract on behalf of his client, the argument that Trump didn't sign it is very weak because Stormy took the money and acted as if the contract was in place.
Click to expand...
Trump claims there is no contract (by extension of his claim they never had an affair). Trump claims he gave no money. There is no consideration (a legal term for "compensation") for her silence (of apparently nothing that never happened). There is no contract. That the parties may have incidentally acted as if a contract were in place is completely irrelevant. but neither party is currently acting as if it were in place.
Based on the interview, it seems that the best shot Stormy has of a settlement is the possible existence of photos or emails that have not yet become public.
Click to expand...
lol, actually that is the worst possible angle. If they are not disputing the contract, then claiming she has images is a direct violation of the contract they are not disputing. Dumbest possible thing for them to do, from the perspective of releasing herself from liability (which is their stated goal).

The reason they posted pictures of some random object that appeared to be a data disk, and implied that the data therein was relevant to their claim, was to bate Trump into saying something they could use against him. He said nothing. Uncharacteristic, no?
As for legality, it's not the payment itself that was illegal, it was failure to report it to SEC afterwards. Don't know about the adultery angle though.
Click to expand...

correct. Failure to report it. Covering up. Obstruction... the usual pattern of behavior that will (hopefully) land him and the rest of his crime family in jail.

Just Google it.. no need not to know in this day and age... "Is Adultery illegal in NY" (I'll spare you the LMGTFY link).
But regardless of who wins in the courtroom, I do enjoy immensely seeing Trump squirm so much he can't even tweet about it. And the other women who are coming forward are a plus. I wish Stormy all the best.
Click to expand...

I wish them the best too. He didn't tweet about it because the accusers have him in a lose-lose situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom