Karen McDougal tells CNN Trump tried to pay her after sex

feedback.pdxradio.com forums feedback.pdxradio.com forums Politics and other things Karen McDougal tells CNN Trump tried to pay her after sex

This topic contains 42 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  cbaravelli 1 year, 7 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #35736

    cbaravelli
    Spectator

    Trump is a sexual predator far beyond any recent president, as is evidenced by all his hush money agreements.” – Vitalogy
    FDR JFK WJC
    MSM is calling Stormy Daniels a former porn star when, in fact, she is a Porn Queen winning Entertainer of the Year four times and her production company / label is still active.
    Fascinating Stephanie Gregory Clifford is a registered Republican since 2008.
    She will get a syndicated television day time talk show out of this. A blonde Wendy Williams.

    #36183

    cbaravelli
    Spectator
    #36184

    edselehr
    Participant

    And you still haven’t said whether you think she is telling the truth…or have you? (maybe I missed it)

    If it’s true she had an affair with Trump…then what does all the other stuff matter?

    #36188

    cbaravelli
    Spectator

    resend:

    Ms. McDougal has a $150K contract with AMI and claims National Enquirer kills her story. Mr. Sanjin has a $30K contract with AMI and claims National Enquirer kills his story.
    She is also in breach of contract with AMI. I find Karen’s “I didn’t understand what I was signing” bimbo defense very weak.
    He is just a schmoo from the Bronx without much of a retirement trying to cash in.
    There may be others. We’ll have to wait and see what DOJ “Taint Team” allows.
    I don’t care. 72 to 78 percent of Americans don’t care.
    You know the saying. Democrats screw their secretaries, Republicans screw the country. I’ve been to a few embassy staff parties in D.C. Carnal Carnivals.

    #36191

    Andy Brown
    Participant

    Attempts to silence either of these women is failing.

    BTW: Penalty clauses are unenforceable.

    https://wapo.st/2IWfO1G

    “In the United States, a liquidated damage clause is intended to estimate damages in the event of non-performance or breach of contract. A liquidated damages clause will be enforced where the court finds that the harm caused by the breach is difficult to estimate, but where the amount of liquidated damages is reasonable compensation and not disproportionate to the actual or anticipated damage. The intent of liquidated damages is simply to measure damages that are hard to prove once incurred. If the liquidated damages are disproportionate, they can, however, be declared a penalty. The clause is then void, and recovery will be limited to the actual damage that results from the breach.”

    http://bit.ly/2IWfXCg

    In general, poorly written contracts on the whole become unenforceable. While no short list of reasons covers everything, here are the most common reasons:

    Lack Of Capacity

    Clearly that does apply to drumpf, but not to the extent needed. It doesn’t matter, the real red meat is further down. Keep reading.

    It’s expected that both (or all) parties to a contract have the ability to understand exactly what it is they are agreeing to. If it appears that one side did not have this reasoning capacity, the contract may be held unenforceable against that person.

    Duress

    Duress, or coercion, will invalidate a contract when someone was threatened into making the agreement.

    Undue Influence

    This could be the one, but there’s more. Keep reading.

    If Person B forced Person A to enter into an agreement by taking advantage of a special or particularly persuasive relationship that Person B had with Person A, the resulting contract might be found unenforceable on grounds of undue influence.

    Misrepresentation

    In the Stormy Daniels contract, this may apply. This means Cohen representing drumpf who denies the whole thing storyline with no real names on the paperwork which is unsigned outweighs the check resulting in the Court throwing the whole thing out.

    If fraud or misrepresentation occurred during the negotiation process, any resulting contract will probably be held unenforceable. The idea here is to encourage honest, good faith bargaining and transactions. Misrepresentations commonly occur when a party says something false (telling a potential buyer that a house is termite-free when it is not) or, in some other way, conceals or misrepresents a state of affairs (concealing evidence of structural damage in a house’s foundation with paint or a particular placement of furniture).

    Nondisclosure

    Nondisclosure is essentially misrepresentation through silence — when someone neglects to disclose an important fact about the deal. Courts look at various issues to decide whether a party had a duty to disclose the information, but courts will also consider whether the other party could or should have easily been able to access the same information.

    Unconscionability

    Unconscionability means that a term in the contract or something inherent in or about the agreement was so shockingly unfair that the contract simply cannot be allowed to stand as is. The idea here again is to ensure fairness, so a court will consider:
    whether one side has grossly unequal bargaining power
    whether one side had difficulty understanding the terms of the agreement (due to language or literacy issues, for example), or
    whether the terms themselves were unfair (like sky-high arbitration costs; read more in Nolo’s article Arbitration Clauses in Contracts).
    If a court does find a contract unconscionable, it has options other than just voiding the agreement altogether. It may instead choose to enforce the conscionable parts of the contract and rewrite the unconscionable term or clause, for example.

    Public Policy
    Mistake

    Sometimes a contract is unenforceable not because of purposeful bad faith by one party, but due to a mistake on the part of one party (called a “unilateral mistake”) or both parties (called a “mutual mistake”). In either case, the mistake must have been about something important related to the contract, and it must have had a material (significant) effect on the exchange or bargaining process.

    Contracts can be found unenforceable on grounds of public policy not only to protect one of the parties involved, but also because what the contract represents could pose harm to society as a whole.

    Impossibility

    In some cases, a contract is deemed unenforceable because it would be impossible or impracticable to carry out its terms — too difficult or too expensive, for example. To claim impossibility, you would need to show that:
    you can’t complete performance under the contract because of some unexpected event that’s not your fault
    the contract didn’t make the risk of the unexpected event something you needed to shoulder, and
    performing the contract will be much more difficult or expensive now.

    http://bit.ly/2IWxnyC

    So it is fairly easy to try and consolidate these two drumpf sexual liaisons and make them about the initial breach of contract but as the original link states in as many words that one million dollars per infraction in the Daniels “contract” is not a reasonable estimate of damages.

    Yes, indeed, most folks don’t care nor follow anything more than headlines. However, it is not as simple as it may seem and both women have legitimate cases, but for different reasons.

    #36193

    Vitalogy
    Participant

    In Trump’s world, everyone is a liar but himself.

    #36225

    radiodork
    Spectator

    Only one was dumb enough to lie and say “ I did not have sexual affairs with that woman”. Only one was dumb enough to leave his seman stain on a blue dress. Slick Willy.

    #36227

    Brianl
    Participant

    So what you’re saying, Dork, is that Stormy Daniels is lying and Donald is telling the truth here? Even though Daniels was paid to be quiet on what Trump says never even happened?

    #36234

    cbaravelli
    Spectator

    Andy Brown contribution seems persuasive but misses the point.
    The pesky Settlement Agreement Dispute Resolution Clause [5.2] for ADBS binding arbitration. Trump attorneys’ motion for such is still before the Central Calexico Federal District Court as well as Ms. Clifford’s Los Angeles Superior Court complaint “David Davidson” never signs the contract (he doesn’t have to) and the Agreement is therefore void.
    The Judge:
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-republican-judge-who-could-decide-the-fate-of-stormy-daniels-v-donald-j-trump
    The Sketch:
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/stormy-daniels-lawyer-reveals-sketch-of-man-who-allegedly-threatened-her
    Looks like Patriot’s Quarterback Tom Brady.

    Ms. Clifford appears at the Michael Cohen hearing in Manhattan Federal District Court yesterday. Who pays for the 12 airline round-trip tickets, massive security posse and a half floor at the Lexington Hotel? Answer is more important than whose penis is in what vagina.
    The Judge:
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/cohen-case-heard-judge-kimba-wood-aka-love-judge-article-1.3936953
    The Kimmel:
    Jimmy Kimmel Mocks Sean Hannity After He Is Revealed As Michael Cohen’s Mystery Client

    #36235

    Andy Brown
    Participant

    “but misses the point.”

    No, it doesn’t. It hits the point squarely on the nose which your links do not as they provide a lot useless side information that is irrelevant for the most part.

    #36239

    cbaravelli
    Spectator

    Read the Settlement, Andy. Courts always grant arbitration proceedings. Always. Contract Law is the most paramount of all.
    Only point you’re link makes with relevance is the one million dollars per contract violation stipulation. That appears offensive and unfair for unspecified damages.
    Judges are irrelevant? C’mon.

    #36242

    Andy Brown
    Participant

    “Only one was dumb enough to leave his seman stain on a blue dress. Slick Willy.”

    First off, dork, it’s semen not “seman.” Second, not only can’t you spell, you can’t make conclusions and form your normally wrong opinions until all the facts are presented, which they haven’t been. The reason for that is until the contract is thrown out by the court (which it will be), revealing that evidence would be in violation of the agreement. Many in the uninformed contingent are saying that even filing to have the contract thrown out is a violation, but that is not true. The “liquidated” damages clause is not enforceable because it was poorly written.

    As far as the further evidence, until the case moves along a bit, we’ll just have to wait to see what Stormy has. I know you’d like to think that this will all end up OK for your drumpkin boy, but heads up, this is a total disaster for the drumpf administration.

    Oh, and one more item dorquie, you are aware that Stormy Daniels passed a polygraph. Even faux news has reported that:

    http://fxn.ws/2ptPwMb

    #36243

    cbaravelli
    Spectator

    “Hi everyone. So, for years, Mr. Cohen has acted like he is above the law. He has considered himself, and openly referred to himself, as Mr. Trump’s fixer.
    He has played by a different set of rules — or should we say, no rules at all. He has never thought that the little man, or especially women, and even more, women like me, mattered. That ends now. My attorney and I are committed to making sure that everyone finds out the truth and the facts of what happened, and I give my word that we will not rest until that happens.” – Stephanie Clifford

    Sex is healthy. 90% of the country think they both screwed their brains out. Hell, 8 of 10 evangelicals (whatever that is) think so. But, 75% of Americans don’t care.
    If some y’all are thinkin’ this kerfuffle will do what RussiaGate was suposin’ to do, then yer barkin’ up at the wrong bird nest.

    #36245

    Vitalogy
    Participant

    Nobody cares about the sex. We care about the lying that it didn’t happen. Of course evangelical losers look past that because that’s what they do. They can’t help themselves when it comes to hypocrisy.

    As for Michael Cohen, he’s in deep, deep doo-doo.

    And so is Hannity by the way. What a POS for not disclosing his legal relationship with Cohen. I have no doubts that Hannity has dirt to hide. Why else does Cohen try to protect Hannity’s identity as a client?

    #36263

    Chris_Taylor
    Participant

    I’m beginning to believe, as Andrew has stated previously, that the affairs of Trump, might actually bring him down and force him out office.

    Our national nightmare continues.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.