I pretty much figured that Mika and Joe's 3rd hour was a repeat...

[cbreezen]

But, there is too much Stormy Daniels crap in my opinion.

Unless she wants to tell us that she's Barron's mom, or she is raising his child, I'm not interested.

This will not be anything other than a salacious story. It's titillating for sure, but that's about it.

[Blue_Adept]

1. Except for the FEC violations

Or the potential for blackmail.

Add in that the lawyer is now saying that she was physically threatened.

Or a host of other legal issues.

But, you know, that's just titillating stuff I guess.

[cbreezen]

6. Trolls don't identify themselves. Look at my profile. nt

[malaise]

10. And they rarely pay subscriptions

[cbreezen]

16. Thanks. lol! nt

[cbreezen]

7. See reply to post 2. nt

[SixString]

35. ...

[Dr Hobbitstein]

22. Are you? Nt

[FarPoint]

25. Stop it now.

If you have a concern...we have an alert option ..

[patricia92243]

4. Agreed. n/t

[cbreezen]

8. See reply to post 2. nt

[dem4decades]

5. You say Stormy Daniels crap like it's a bad thing.

Nope the more the merrier. And let the other's come forward too.

[cbreezen]

11. I think the story is a distraction.

You are entitled to your opinion.

[Kirk Lover]

17. Boy if I had a dime for every time I've heard this "distraction" crap. n/t

[LanternWaste]

52. How many stories does it takes to distract you? Two? Three?

How many stories does it takes to distract you? Two? Three?

What is it distracting you from, and what specifically leads you to believe it's a distraction?

[poboy2]

13. Whether picador or bullfighter himself, let justice, truth take down the treasonous bullshitter. -nt

[USALiberal]

9. Enjoy your short stay! Nt

[cbreezen]

12. I've been here all evening posting about my own personal life. nt

[malaise]

15. I think it's a huge story

Like you I thought it was a distraction, but it's much more important than I first thought.
That said I don't think you're a troll.

[Kirk Lover]

18. Totally agree. As I predicted when this first came out there is more to this

story then met the eye and it's not going anywhere. Someone posted that trashbag fired Tillerson to 'distract' from the Stormy story and I said he can try to do that if trashbag wishes but this story ain't going nowhere...and here we are.

[cbreezen]

20. All I'm trying to say is that in the end...

this will be part of the story, not THE story.

[Blue_Adept]

28. That's not what you said at all

"This will not be anything other than a salacious story. It's titillating for sure, but that's about it. " <- that's what you said.

[cbreezen]

31. Well, I think you get what I'm saying...

pick my words to pieces if you wish. It is a blip on the radar compared to everything else.

You are free to disagree.

[EffieBlack]

26. I was puzzled why the press spent so much time on this when they usually lost

interest pretty quickly in similar-seeming stories previously. But then I realized they probably either had information they couldn’t pin down or reveal - or maybe just a spidey-sense - that this was about much more than sex.

That looks to be the case. The press knew something was up but just couldn’t say. Now it’s going to start to unravel.

[malaise]

30. +1,000

[LexVegas]

19. Thanks for letting us know. nt

[spanone]

21. Her lawyer disclosed that she was threatened with physical violence

not titillating ...criminal

[cbreezen]

23. I've worked in the legal system...

I have a built-in cynicism. For me, I don't take every word a lawyer says as gospel.

I am also a survivor of abuse. So, I do take the accusations of a victim seriously.

I'll wait until I hear it from her.

[spanone]

24. your prerogative.

[EffieBlack]

27. Jonathan Turley was just on vouching for him

Turley is usually very skeptical, but he sang her lawyer’s praises - he was Turley’s former student and research assistant, so he knows him well. Said he is an excellent lawyer, not a grandstander, and as solid as they come. That says a lot.

[cbreezen]

33. I reserve judgment until I hear from Stephanie Clifford. nt

[jberryhill]

38. That doesn't mean Turley can vouch for the facts

In your practice, if a crime is committed against one of your clients, what do you normally do in addition to including it as a count in a civil suit?

[EffieBlack]

40. I didnt say he was vouching for the facts

And I’m not interested in jumping through your hypo hoops. Please find someone else to play with.

[jberryhill]

46. DU has an ignore button

If my posts bother you, you can use it. I do not understand why you need to personalize legal discussions.

Be that as it may, if a client of mine had been threatened with physical force in a breach of contract dispute, I'd be filing a lot more than a complaint for what amounts to recission of the contract.

Any competent attorney would.

[EffieBlack]

48. He didnt say the threat came during the breach of contract dispute

Since he said this during a discussion about the circumstances of her entering into the agreement, the implication is that the threat was used to induce her to sign the contract in 2016. But we don’t really know at this point.

And, any competent lawyer knows that he can’t take any action on behalf of his client without her consent, so unless we know that she’s authorized him to act on the threat that she says was made before she engaged his representation or are privy to what he may be doing behind the scenes that hasn’ yet been made public, none of us is in any position to armchair quarterback him.

[jberryhill]

49. Um...

"so unless we know that she’s authorized him to act on the threat..."

As opposed to talk about it on TV?

If the original contract was made under the threat of physical force, then Avenatti apparently missed that issue entirely in the civil suit.

That alone would be an independent ground for voiding the contract. But the civil suit makes no such claim.

[EffieBlack]

54. As I said, as much as you seem to enjoy second-guessing other lawyers decisions,

and pronouncing what you would do differently and better, unless you know all of the facts and circumstances that he knows, you’re not equipped to criticize what he is and isn’t doing. And you certainly don’t know what you would do in his situation since you haven’t a clue what the situation is.

[brush]

39. He paid her 130k just before the election to keep quiet. That's not a huge story to you?

[jberryhill]

45. The fact of the payment has broader implications

What sort of sex they had, how long they had it, etc., is not of any particular consequence.

The payment? Sure, that may be an illegal campaign violation. How the payment was arranged may involve other sorts of issues like money laundering.

But the fact of the payment is not a disputed issue in the Daniels suit.

People are acting as if Daniels is some kind of hero in all of this.

Here's a simple life lesson - if you want to speak publicly about something, then don't take $130k not to speak publicly about something. It's a simple principle to follow.

[PJMcK]

51. A question

Your points are clear and focused, as usual. Here's my question for you. If Ms. Daniels faced a choice of either accepting the $130K and signing the NDA or being threatened with physical violence what would her legal options be now given the facts that she signed the NDA and accepted the money?

[LanternWaste]

53. I've little doubt that's how you need to interpret the reactions.

"People are acting as if Daniels is some kind of hero in all of this..."

I've little doubt that's how you need to interpret the reactions in your desire to minimize and trivialize the story.

[Squinch]

44. So your post discounting the importance of her story, that's you waiting til you hear it from her?

[Ilsa]

29. Trump has been trying to distract from the Stormy Daniels story,

not the other way around.

[cbreezen]

32. It's a distraction for US. Look at how many responses this post garnered.

It proves my point.

[LexVegas]

34. ...

[Ilsa]

55. I think I can handle more than one headline at a time,

and I am not going to forget the collusion, money laundering, threats to national security, civil rights, etc.

[Squinch]

43. Seems he's not the only one. Nothing to see here, doncha know?

[H2O Man]

36. gosh

[spanone]

37. 😁👍🏼

[Nitram]

41. It's not just titillating. There are quite likely criminal actions involved in paying hush money out

of campaign funds, and perhaps threats of physical violence.

[Squinch]

42. Thanks for this. It was making me anxious, not knowing your feelings about this and all.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

47. Beyond salacious: criminal threats, lying, lack of transparency, coverup, hypocrisy exposed. . . .nt

[HipChick]

50. It's not the sex, but the cover-up

and what the traitor knows about it? He's a control freak, and I doubt there is little he did not know...