- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why Stormy Daniels is Dangerous - Beyond STD Potential
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:21 am to Haughton99
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:21 am to Haughton99
quote:
Are you predicting low ratings for the interview Sunday night?
It will get ratings and eat up the news cycle next week. What they should be covering wall to wall is this disastrous 1.3T spending bill.
But covering a rich poon hound getting pussy 12 years ago is more important.
That is where we are as a country.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:23 am to Flame Salamander
Do you think she will promote the MAHA Tour shes on?
Would be glorious if that's all she did
Would be glorious if that's all she did
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:28 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Here’s a hint: no one cares about Stormy Daniels.
It's funny cause they have to know this by now yet they still keep trying to make it a thing.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:29 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Here’s a hint: no one cares about Stormy Daniels.
Oh yes they do. A lot of people do.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:30 am to TigerAxeOK
quote:
This needs to be litigated in the highest possible court to make it more about Daniels than about TRUMP. So POTUS's lawyers need to be careful how they approach this, as to not legitimize Daniels' claims, as well as to not violate the NDA themselves.
Trump has hired Charles Harder, the guy who bankrupted Gawker when he represented Hulk Hogan in his civil suit against the media outlet. They have asked the court to remove the case to federal court and have filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration.
Additionally, Daniels's argument that the NDA isn't valid because Trump didn't sign it is laughable to a 2nd year law student. First, Trump is a third-party beneficiary to the agreement and thus has standing and privity to enforce said agreement. Second, lawyers have actual authority to bind their clients to agreements with third-parties. So if Trump, acting as the principal, authorized Cohen to effectuate this NDA, either by express or implied means, Cohen is acting with actual authority, which Daniels would have most certainly known.
This isn't going to turn out well for Stormy.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:38 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
Motion to Compel Arbitration
I have no idea why this would not be granted. The Federal Arbitration Act, and applicable state acts make arbitration nearly impossible to avoid. Assuming this matter was already arbitrated once (I think I've heard that), I am also assuming that the Order / Judgment that it produced is also enforceable against her.
As the "publisher" of this info subject to a confidentiality contract / order - CBS and Cooper may have some civil liability, but I'm not sure. They certainly would in a defamation matter.
Regardless. This will not end well for Stormy. Eventually CBS and Cooper will also throw her under the bus once she has outlived her useful life. I hope that the $130K was worth it to her.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:50 am to Wednesday
quote:
I hope that the $130K was worth it to her.
She's gonna end up losing that money plus whatever money she's being paid by the media to tell her story when Trump's lawyers rip her a new one in a defamation or breach of contract suit.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:54 am to Wednesday
quote:
If we make bullshite like this into news, then nobody has a right to privacy - or mistakes. I believe all people have a right to both.
People have always been interested in who the rich and famous are sleeping with, they are even more interested in it when it involves someone they aren't married to. Privacy doesn't extend to someone else involved in the situation just because you want to keep it private.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 10:57 am to Dizz
quote:
Privacy doesn't extend to someone else involved in the situation just because you want to keep it private.
It certainly does if there is an enforceable contract to keep it private, which exists in this case.
I'm interested in knowing your credit card number and your credit score. How bout I call up your bank and ask them for it.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 11:19 am to Wednesday
The op was referring to personal privacy when it came to personal issues or indiscretions.
The problem with the NDA is that you can't stop someone from talking about it, you can only get damages after they do it. Trump's team has claimed Stormy has already violated the NDA 20 times and she could owe 20mill. It doesn't matter if they go after her for $500k or 20milllion she can't pay it. If they go after her she has nothing to lose by not telling the whole story.
The problem with the NDA is that you can't stop someone from talking about it, you can only get damages after they do it. Trump's team has claimed Stormy has already violated the NDA 20 times and she could owe 20mill. It doesn't matter if they go after her for $500k or 20milllion she can't pay it. If they go after her she has nothing to lose by not telling the whole story.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 11:58 am to Dizz
CBS has $20million, and has assisted her in a knowing breach of a contractual obligation to keep something private.
I see nothing different btwn this and the agreeement btwn you and your bank to avoid disclosing your credit card/checking account number.
Effectively, yes, all he can do is sue for damages, which he should.
I see nothing different btwn this and the agreeement btwn you and your bank to avoid disclosing your credit card/checking account number.
Effectively, yes, all he can do is sue for damages, which he should.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 12:58 pm to Wednesday
quote:
CBS has $20million, and has assisted her in a knowing breach of a contractual obligation to keep something private.
CBS is not a party to that contact.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 1:14 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
First, Trump is a third-party beneficiary to the agreement and thus has standing and privity to enforce said agreement.
If he received this benefit during the campaign though, that being the benefit of a $130,000 payoff by his lawyer as a gift (since Cohen has complained about not being paid back), would this not be an impermissable benefit under FEC law? Pretty sure that's the question.
That is the issue at stake I think, not whether they had sex or not. It's funny that the "Best Dealmaker" couldn't even get this one right.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 1:15 pm to Flame Salamander
quote:
When will Chicken start using Stormy Daniels footage in the Sports Lite links on the TD homepage?
he usually respects former posters better than that
Posted on 3/22/18 at 1:30 pm to Dizz
quote:
The problem with the NDA is that you can't stop someone from talking about it, you can only get damages after they do it. Trump's team has claimed Stormy has already violated the NDA 20 times and she could owe 20mill. It doesn't matter if they go after her for $500k or 20milllion she can't pay it. If they go after her she has nothing to lose by not telling the whole story.
i believe it's possible to get an injunction
so then violation would be subject to possible court oversight
Posted on 3/22/18 at 1:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
If I have to pick which to watch Stormy, or Tiger baseball. i'll watch the tigers
Posted on 3/22/18 at 3:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i believe it's possible to get an injunction
It is possible, but it would take a lot for a court to issue an injunction to stop someone from talking about an affair.
Posted on 3/22/18 at 3:08 pm to Dizz
quote:
CBS is not a party to that contacT
You don’t have to be a party to a contract to commit the tort of an invasion of privacy
This post was edited on 3/22/18 at 3:12 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News