Playmate porn star and reality TV contestant in court over Trump

[Gold Dragon]

I don't think anyone expected Trump to be a choir boy in the past. His marital infidelities are well documented. And if he turned his life around, acknowledged past indiscretions and moved on, nobody would bat an eye.

But it is his attempts to deny and cover up the situation, making easily falsified accusations against Daniels, illegal activities of his proxy Cohen and ongoing ethically questionable behaviour of his team that are problematic and will likely get Trump in trouble.

Stormy Daniels’s legal battle against Trump, explained

What’s more, Cohen’s story about the case implicates him in legal misconduct. He told the New York Times in February, “Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly,” which suggests that he conducted substantial business on Trump’s behalf without Trump’s knowledge.

“If he is speaking truthfully that Trump had no knowledge of the payment, he signed a document on behalf of a client (and ostensibly binding the client) without either consulting with his client or securing his consent. That would be a clear ethical breach,” Turley writes. “If he did not have Trump’s consent, his representations to Daniels would appear false and potentially fraudulent.”

The ethical baggage for Cohen doesn’t end there. He could also face censure or even disbarment for making Daniels sign a false statement denying the affair under the New York Lawyer’s Code of Professional Responsibility, which states, “In the representation of a client, a lawyer shall not … Knowingly make a false statement of law or fact.” If Daniels’s allegation says that Cohen coerced her to release the false statement, that could bring even worse consequences for him.

Cohen also appears to have, by getting this restraining order, engaged in legal practice in California without being a member of the California Bar. That is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail.

 

[InTheLight]

Then, what is your (their) point? What is your (their) goal? What is it you (they) hope to accomplish with this agenda if not to put -down- the man making the policies?

Maybe you should simply give up debating. You probably don't even realize you just changed your argument. First you said people would use the Stormy Daniels affair as a reason to not support Trump's policies. Now you are saying people would use the Stormy Daniels affair as a reason to put down Donald Trump.

So what is it--put down the policies or put down the man?

Again, no one on BB is using this incident as a reason to put down the policies. That is the straw man you employed earlier that I had pointed out.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[InTheLight]

Stormy Daniels claims this person who threatened her did so in 2011 before Trump was ever involved in politics and only a handful of people knew of any relationship she had with Trump.

Yes, today there would be many true believers who would threaten her without any sort of payment. In 2011 there was probably some cash involved.

Very good point.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[HankD]

Maybe you should simply give up debating. You probably don't even realize you just changed your argument. First you said people would use the Stormy Daniels affair as a reason to not support Trump's policies. Now you are saying people would use the Stormy Daniels affair as a reason to put down Donald Trump.

So what is it--put down the policies or put down the man?

There would be some of each.

 

[InTheLight]

There would be some of each.

Other people that didn't have an (alleged) affair with Trump can carry forth the same policies. They can't be criticized for having an affair.

 

[HankD]

Other people that didn't have an (alleged) affair with Trump can carry forth the same policies. They can't be criticized for having an affair.

There are permutations of circumstance.

 

[Benjamin]

Again, no one on BB is using this incident as a reason to put down the policies. That is the straw man you employed earlier that I had pointed out.

You're funny! I said earlier it is a waste of time to explain and I should know better than to even start, but, - - - if you were to go back to my post you'd see the "opposition" in my argument, which you attempt to claim I misrepresented their position in order to attack that position (which would make a "strawman" if the existence of that opposition were not true, but sorry it is true) doesn't even mention BB members (your strawman - and attempt to cloud the issue by starting on personal attacks) but pay attention here: I called out the opposition AS THOSE who would partake in such ignorant and fallacious arguments. LOL- to which "you" , for some odd reason, LOL, quickly took offense to my argument and tried to defended with your poor understanding of the term "strawman" and worse yet, total neglect of the purpose for calling out fallacies - (another subject, but this purpose is waaaay too deep to try to explain to you since I'm quite sure we won't get past the first step here on the meaning, purpose and proper usage of philosophical terms. LOL).

Yeah, yeah, I know, "you don't understand a word I said and neither does anyone else", - even if others come on and tell you they did understand it - LOL.

The truth is you continually abuse these philosophical terms here and absolutely use them for the wrong purpose, but I don't expect to get anywhere with you in this kind of format.

But hey, I just want you to know you're alright ITL, look at the bright side, if I didn't like you I wouldn't be coming into your domain occasionally and bother giving you you a hard time.

 

[Benjamin]

I don't think anyone expected Trump to be a choir boy in the past. His marital infidelities are well documented.

True

And if he turned his life around, acknowledged past indiscretions and moved on, nobody would bat an eye.

But, as predicted the fallacious moral superiority argument begins...

But it is his attempts to deny and cover up the situation,...

Sounds like the making of another witch hunt based on if Trump dare to defend himself (starts to mysteriously become a "cover up") against these forementioned moral superiority arguments designed to to turn others away from the man making policies. Like I said, all they got to fight with - but common sense should prevail that the policies are what should be the important issues (what the man is doing now regarding the job he was elected for and the policies).

...making easily falsified accusations against Daniels,...

Such hypocrisy, while this whore is used as a pawn by the Democrats and Trump haters to develop accusations...

...illegal activities of his proxy Cohen and ongoing ethically questionable behaviour of his team that are problematic...

An attempt to silence the vindictive gosip of attention grabbing money hungry whore pawns somehow becomes "ethically questionable behavior" concerning the Trump team seems to assume the development of such witch hunts is "ethical" on the other side? Interesting. Hmmm...

...and will likely get Trump in trouble.

Why yes, that is obviously the goal but I'd call it more of a happy wish that another one of these schemes might bear fruit. .

 

[Benjamin]

So what is it--put down the policies or put down the man?

Odd how you attempt to separate the two, the man, who you took a Never-Trump position against early on, who you attempted to shoot down basically every position and promise he made as a lie, who you said didn't have a chance to win the election, is the one making these policies. Now, you're in to TDS mode and take the side of those scheming to remove him and seem to deny what these policies are related to, the man making them. I see no truth in your reasoning to attempt separate these issues other than to use this as a excuse to continue on the path to fight against the very policies this man is now bringing into reality.

 

[Calminian]

There are sincere conservatives who oppose Trump, or once opposed Trump, but like the policies he's trying to put through. There are also phony conservatives who attempt to sway other conservatives away from Trump, in order to get Dems back in power.

 

[Benjamin]

There are sincere conservatives who oppose Trump, or once opposed Trump, but like the policies he's trying to put through.

This is true, I'm sure they exist, but makes about as much sense as being opposed to fire but claiming to like their steak barbecued...

 

[Calminian]

This is true, I'm sure they exist, but makes about as much sense as being opposed to fire but claiming to like their steak barbecued...

I think there are some (I can think of one that posts here) that initially opposed him but now seem to love absolutely everything he does. They came to their senses and I respect that.

I think there are others that are just leftists pretending to be conservatives. And I'm sure there those in between.

 

[Reynolds]

A confidentity agreement was signed. The woman is a liar. She lied by violating the agreement. I discount everything she says. If true, I can't blame Trump for hooking up with fine women before he was saved.

 

[InTheLight]

A confidentity agreement was signed. The woman is a liar. She lied by violating the agreement. I discount everything she says.

An agreement that Trump never signed.

If true, I can't blame Trump for hooking up with fine women

So married people can "hook up with fine women" so long as they are not saved.

before he was saved.

Yes, and when did Trump get saved?

 

[FollowTheWay]

It'll be very interesting to see you condemn the Apostle Paul, King David, King Solomon, etc., when you see them in heaven. It'll also be interesting to see your reaction if Trump is there. I promise to try not to laugh.

Are you actually comparing Trump to the Apostle Paul, King David and King Solomon? That's way, way out there.

 

[FollowTheWay]

James 4:17 Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.

The sad truth is, a united Church could tip the scales and end the abortion holocaust very soon. But the devil whispers in many ears, and many listen and believe they are to righteous to vote for the pro-life party.

Why hasn't your party done that in the last 45 years? There has been a conservative court majority more than once during that period of time. The truth is the GOP doesn't want to stop abortion. It's a great political ploy to keep you fools voting from them.