âI have no knowledge of that situation,â she said, adding that she hasnât spoken to Trump about the matter.
These press conferences lead one to wonder what the hell do Sanders and Trump talk about with each other?It strikes me as significant that she didnât issue a denial and distanced herself from any knowledge of the story. I donât think sheâs lying here. I donât think she wanted to know and Trump, oddly enough, didnât vent over it. Normally, when he is exorcised about something (like crowd size, collusion, etc), he demands and dictates what he wants said at the presser and prepares for a meltdown if he doesnât get what he wants.
Cohen has a reputation on the street for Sopranos style tactics when heâs squeezing people. Trump is probably aware of his standard practice and is going to let Cohen take the fall. Theyâre afraid of Avenatti. If he is telling people that Stormy was threatened during the negotiations or thereafter, that would invalidate the contract (as well as open up other potential charges). That Trump or Cohen isnât fighting back for the moment is noteworthy to me. At this point, even a subsequent denial should be viewed as tactical, not substantive or factual. They fear that Avenatti has evidence that he can supply to create an issue of fact at trial.
UPDATE: Based on Joshâs interview and some interviews with other networks, Avenatti has said or indicated the following:
- Incidents during WH Tenure - Avenatti indicated âYesâ to a question from Jake Tapper that some of the accusations alleged by Avenatti took place when Donald Trump was President. The question is broad and so it might not be limited to what is in the complaint, but incidents that are not yet submitted as part of the complaint.
- Bad representation - Josh teased out of Avenatti that Stormy Danielsâ prior legal representation may be raised as an issue to support the argument that the contract should be invalidated. Her lawyer at the time seems to have not had his clientâs best interests and may have been working with Cohen as part of a âcatch and releaseâ scam without Stormyâs knowledge.
-
Intimate details - Avenatti reiterates that what gives Daniels her credibility is the level of detail she has about several incidents and is coy about whether these get to intimate/sexual encounters.
left it open that stuff happened, significant detail is what gives her credibility; - Physical threat/danger - Josh asks some probing questions about whether the incidents of intimidation are from random Trumper fans wearing MAGA hats or actual Trump associates. Avenatti confirms that he is talking about Trump associates who were involved in creating false narratives as well as bullying.
- Arbitration v Litigation: Avenatti continues to insist that the contract is invalid and therefore the arbitration is invalid. I think this is his weakest argument from reading the 4 corners of the contract documents, but if the other things he has said are true, then the contract could be invalidated for reasons of public policy.
Overall, LâAffaire Stormy definitely established itself today as a higher grade threat to the Trump Presidency than previously understood. How much of a threat depends on the quality of the evidence Daniels has to present and her willingness to continue taking risks of breaching the contract (which I believe she is doing right now).
In all of todayâs revelations from Avenatti, the illegal campaign donation aspect was not mentioned. I do think the facts warrant a federal investigation, whether by Mueller or a separate DOJ attorney working with the FBI.
Sanders: "Obviously we take the safety and security of any person seriously, certainly would condemn anyone threatening any individual,
âExcept, of course, for undocumented immigrants, and the children of undocumented immigrants, and the families of undocumented immigrants, and people who seem like they are undocumented immigrants and, oh yes, people of low moral character like Stormy Daniels, . . . . and my boss, . . . . and I guess, . . . .me, his devoted slave and servantâ
What does Sister Sarahâs Personal Lord and Savior think about someone threatening the life of a porn star they had an adulterous affair with? She may need to reread the Gospel of Leisure Suit Larry.
Sanders not lying? Surely you jest.
Avenatti is what Cohen imagines himself to be.
I have the feeling that Cohen imagines himself to be Meyer Lansky or Bugsy SiegelâŚ
Princess Hamhocks is Sgt Schultz in drag⌠âI see nothing! I hear nothingâŚâ
It will be a happy, glorious day when I see a presidential spox on tv and itâs not Sarah Huckabuck Slanders.
âObviously we take the safety and security of any person seriously, certainly would condemn anyone threatening any individual,â Sanders said.
âExcept at Trump rallies,â she continued, âwhere the President encourages attendees to âknock the hell out ofâ protesters and the press.â
And anyone protesting at one of his ralliesâŚ
âObviously we take the safety and security of any person seriously, certainly would condemn anyone threatening any individual,â Sanders said.
âAnd Stormy Daniels is threatening the safety and security of the president by being willing and ready to tell the truth, and we most certainly condemn her. Not only do we condemn her, but we have sent Michael Cohen and the Trump Organization attorneys after her to do their worst.â
I am not convinced that her lawyer was referencing anything from Cohen. The statements seemed to me, be more about wackos on social media making threats against her (and him). The piece from Joshâs podcast seems to read even more like thatâŚlike the threats are recent (which is what happens when a person gains the spotlight for something like this).
Her not issuing a denial and creating distance matches up to that, too. âHey, we actually donât know every kook on the internetâ. And even if Cohen IS making threats, this is the tact I would expect them to take. Complete and utter denial.
I think Cohen IS in a tight spot right now, and Trump will ultimately let him fall on his sword/push him on to his sword. But I am not convinced that its going to be based on Cohen stupidly making personal threats against her.
âObviously we take the safety and security of any person seriously, certainly would condemn anyone threatening any individual,â Sanders said.
Excuse me, but didnât Trump say we should go after the families of terrorists?
[quote=âdaveyjones64, post:14, topic:69690â]
Her not issuing a denial and creating distance matches up to that, too. âHey, we actually donât know every kook on the internetâ.
[/quote]Well, they know Donald, Jr. and I hear tell his social media usage has now been set free to go even more places heâs wanted to go.
âObviously we take the safety and security of any person seriously.â
Unless of course theyâre school children. Then weâll throw them in front of the next active shooter to appease the NRA.
Every reporter needs start or end their question with âSarah have you talk to Trump about XYZ?â or âonly if you have talked to the President about XYZ.â
It was a good idea for Stormy to retain a War Time Consiglieri.
âAny person between me and the buffet lineâ, Sarah Huckabee clarified.