Trump is Again trying to Pay Stormy Daniels Hush Money: MSNBC

Friday, October 18, 2024

New reporting from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow revealed that Donald Trump is once again attempting to keep Stormy Daniels silent before an election -- despite the former president awaiting sentencing on 34 felony charges related to hush money payments before the 2016 election.

Posted by reinheitsgebot at 09:30 PM | 16 COMMENTS | permalink

Comments

The party of family values supporting a rapist who cheated on ALL of his wives.

Can Brawndo be far behind?

#1 | Posted by Nixon at 2024-10-17 12:19 PM

Dementia Donnie forgot he did that already.

... Trump is Again trying to Pay Stormy Daniels Hush Money: MSNBC ...

Yeah ...

Trump sought new NDA from Stormy Daniels this year, documents show
www.cbsnews.com

... In late July, a lawyer for former President Donald Trump asked the adult film star Stormy Daniels to sign an agreement promising not to speak about her "interactions" with Trump or question "his suitability as a candidate for president," documents provided to CBS News by Daniels' attorney Clark Brewster show.

In exchange, according to the documents, he offered her a financial incentive -- a reduction in the amount Trump would accept to settle legal fees related to a defamation lawsuit. The agreement would have essentially silenced Daniels from speaking about Trump in the lead up to the 2024 election.

It was an extraordinary demand that came only eight weeks after Trump was convicted of 34 felonies related to a plot to cover up a nondisclosure agreement Daniels signed days before the 2016 presidential election in exchange for $130,000. Daniels claimed she had a sexual encounter with Trump years before, which Trump denies.

MSNBC reported the NDA demand on Wednesday night, citing letters sent to Brewster from a lawyer for Trump. Brewster provided the letters to CBS News on Thursday.

I don't know of any law that requires her to sign an NDA unless it's something to which she has already agreed.

Trump's lawyers are panicking, so the ball is in her court. They're thinking that she could do a dozen strategically placed sit-downs between now and November 5th and there's nothing they can do to stop her.

Personally, I doubt any such interviews would sway any votes. The public already knows about the one-night stand and, at this point, has a lot more reasons to reject Trump than one of his many his infidelity.

If it was me, I'd let Trump's lawyers sweat.

@#4 ... Trump's lawyers are panicking ...

Which likely means that fmr Pres Trump is panicking.

But... why?

Has some new evidence been surfaced?

LAMP

"Has some new evidence been surfaced?"

No, but that's just it. Trump judges everybody by his own standards which are somewhere between low and non-existent. He anticipates that Stormy would do the same thing he would do. And that's go on a revenge trip to destroy him just prior to the election.

Unlike Trump, Stormy seems to be more about justice than revenge. But Trump wouldn't understand that. He thinks everybody is as dishonest and underhanded as himself.

So, Trump's paranoia rules the day.

I get why Trump supporters are throwing nothing burgers at Harris, because they know they're losing. I really don't understand the logic of nothingburgers like this story. You can ask anyone to sign an NDA, as long as you don't illegally coerce them or commit fraud to cover it up. The latter is apparently what Trump was convicted of, not because he offered or paid anyone "hush money".

its election interference AGAIN.

"election interference"

Trump and his supporters have successfully trolled you guys into abusing this term so it doesn't mean anything anymore. That's why they're calling the simple editing of Harris's 60 minutes interview "election interference". You're (unwittingly?) helping them confuse a segment of the public.

An NDA, in itself, is not election interference. Just like Bill Clinton lying to the public and asking Monica Lewinsky to keep quiet were not in themselves crimes. The suborning of and committing perjury were another matter.

So where's the crime here? AFAIC there's no new evidence of fraud committed on a legal document or in a legal proceeding.

ALEX

Attitudes have changed a lot since the days of Bill and Monica Lewinski when a b***j** nearly brought down a presidency.

Trying to pay huush money to someone badmouthing you 2 weeks before an election is election interference. He's done it twice now.

"he suborning of and committing perjury were another matter."

#10 | Posted by sentinel at 2024-10-19 10:25 AM | Flag: Concerned?

"Our impeachment of President Clinton was another example of placing the wrong political emphasis on personal matters. We impeached Clinton for lying to the government. To our surprise the electorate gave us cold comfort. Lying to the government: It's called April 15th. And we accused Clinton of lying about sex, which all men spend their lives doing, starting at 15 bragging about things we haven't done yet, then on to fibbing about things we are doing, and winding up with prevarications about things we no longer can do." - P.J. O'Rourke