Saturday, 10 March 2018

Stormy Daniels May Be A Legal Genius (or at least her lawyer is)

quote [ This episode examines the Complaint filed by Stormy Daniels seeking a legal determination that the Settlement Agreement entered into between her, Donald Trump’s lawyer, and (allegedly) Donald Trump is not legally binding.

We honestly believe that this is a much bigger bombshell than is being portrayed by the press. Listen and find out why. ]

I always thought the Stormy Daniels issue was a big deal because once a suspect lies you basically stop going to them for information. They're no longer a credible witness and a lawyer putting them on the stand is suicide (and that works out either way).

This really goes into depth about how the whole situation is bigger than even I thought it was.

It's OA154 in case this moves.
[SFW] [politics] [+7 Interesting]
[by Taxman]
<-- Entry / Comment History

Taxman said @ 3:04pm GMT on 10th March
No angle. Not sure why you think someone can only be in trouble for one thing at a time.

The “Russian thing” hasn’t been released, so not sure how it can be “not panning out”.

Listen to the podcast, they bring up Clinton. You know what makes this different? Paying money, through an LLC created solely to pay hush money, to prevent Election Day embarrassment. That’s a crime. He could have just admitted the affair and probably would have been fine (no one prosecutes adultery). However, he apparently felt it necessary to commit a bunch of crimes to hide it.

They couldn’t get Clinton to stick because verbally lying (no monetary/intimidation fueled cover-up) about something embarrassing didn’t appear to rise to the level. Paying large sums of money to influence an election 11 days prior? I guess we’ll see.



Taxman said @ 3:05pm GMT on 10th March
No angle. Not sure why you think someone can only be in trouble for one thing at a time.

The “Russian thing” hasn’t been released, so not sure how it can be “not panning out”.

Listen to the podcast, they bring up Clinton. You know what makes this different? Paying money, through an LLC created solely to pay hush money, to prevent Election Day embarrassment. That’s a crime. He could have just admitted the affair and probably would have been fine (no one prosecutes adultery). However, he apparently felt it necessary to commit a bunch of crimes to hide it.

They couldn’t get Clinton to stick because verbally lying (no monetary/intimidation fueled cover-up) about something embarrassing didn’t appear to rise to the level. Paying large sums of money to influence an election 11 days prior? I guess we’ll see.



<-- Entry / Current Comment
Taxman said @ 3:04pm GMT on 10th March [Score:1]
No angle. Not sure why you think someone can only be in trouble for one thing at a time.

The “Russian thing” hasn’t been released, so not sure how it can be “not panning out”.

Listen to the podcast, they bring up Clinton. You know what makes this different? Paying money, through an LLC created solely to pay hush money, to prevent Election Day embarrassment. That’s a crime. He could have just admitted the affair and probably would have been fine (no one prosecutes adultery). However, he apparently felt it necessary to commit a bunch of crimes to hide it.

They couldn’t get Clinton to stick because verbally lying (no monetary/intimidation fueled cover-up) about something embarrassing didn’t appear to rise to the level. Paying large sums of money to influence an election 11 days prior? I guess we’ll see.




Posts of Import
Karma
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings
ScoobySnacks
HoZay
Paracetamol
lilmookieesquire
arrowhen