Posted on 08/27/2018 7:03:20 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
In the history of presidential scandals, it is often the hidden things that end up proving decisive. Think, for example, of Monica Lewinsky’s stained blue dress or of Richard M. Nixon’s secret Oval Office tapes.
But in President Donald Trump’s recent scandal involving Stephanie Clifford, the pornographic film star known as Stormy Daniels, something that was never there to begin with could play an unexpected role.
The missing item is the signature Trump failed to place on Clifford’s nondisclosure deal two years ago. And if her lawyer has his way, there is a chance that the inch-long blank space could force Trump to testify about what he knew of the arrangement.
As the world found out in more detail last week, the man who structured the hush-money payment, Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael D. Cohen, pleaded guilty to several charges in federal court.
Under the arrangement, Clifford was paid $130,000 just before the 2016 elections to not speak publicly about an affair that she said she had with Trump. In admitting to the scheme, Cohen not only implicated himself, but also possibly his former boss, in a violation of federal campaign-finance law.
It remains unclear, however, whether Trump, as president, can be held accountable for that offense.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
What...
Evuh...
Yes, in the context of the article, they do mean "testify".
But I'm willing to bet the headline writer was trying to conjure images of a bad monarch being thrown down from his throne -- you know: deposed.
What lunacy— the signature of the document stating that Cohen represented the client, who is identified and DOES not need to sign a non-disclosure agreement made with a legal representative for a principal party. This is NOT a mortgage or a Title. It’s an NDA and paid for. The NDA is a receipt to a porno queen, a blackmailer.
This article is silly.
Nope.
The terms of the NDA are “non-disclosed”. There is NO way this article’s writer can say “ an affair” with Trump— no way whatsoever. All supposition created by that thug Avenatti- who is is deep crap with the feds.
One more specious element in this tabloid article.
The putrid desperation of LIB lunatics never ceases to amuse me. What pathetic oafs and festering losers .
Did the lady of questionable repute take the money?
Yes?
Case over.
Always a false premise in there somewhere......
[This article is silly.]
Well, the author IS Alan Feuer, New York Times.
I don’t know of him. But “New York Times” tells me all I need to know.
Boy, what a stretch this is. These people never cease to amaze me.
Wasn’t Bill Clinton deposed in the Paula Jones case? Why yes, he was. Guess what. Trump’s bad character is going to lead to a similar outcome. And Trump was a close friend of Bill and Hillary Clinton. He insisted that they attend his third wedding. And he defended Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky investigation. What too many “conservatives” have done is treat Trump the same way liberals treated Bill Clinton. They gave unconditional love and loyalty to a deeply flawed man. Sadly, that lesson is lost on Trump lovers who have followed him in to loving Putin and other rogues.
Not so fast... I want to know how she reported it on her taxes.
Did she cash the check? It’s a contract.
Obviously, Trump intended to sign the document, if in fact such a document does exist, or ever existed. Moreover, there was a verbal agreement, maybe even a handshake and verbal and handshake agreements have been held up in court.
Signatures or lack of a signature on a document mean nothing.
I smell Russians.
“...but also possibly his former boss, in a violation of federal campaign-finance law. “
What violation would that be, pray tell. Oh you don’t have that info. Then shut up.
Hillary’s just jealous she couldn’t have attracted Stormy.
Did the lady of unquestionable ill repute pay taxes on the income?
What are you smoking, NeverTrumper?
Trump is not a “deeply flawed character” and fans of Trump are not automatically fans of Nelson Mandala’s wife or Putin.
You jump to some wild conclusions from nothing at all.
I think your character needs review.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.