Sexist analyst is sexist.
I disagree. sir.
Ms. Daniels has had a far more honorable career than the Mango Mussolini, and she hasnât screwed the ENTIRE country like Donnie hasâŚ
And I donât get the feeling Stormy is in it for the money, unlike Dotard.
Even if she only gets a $1 symbolic payout, it is priceless for how much it will piss him off
But you put 12 ordinary people on a jury and say to them, âaward her money because somebody called her a liar,â I think youâd have a hard time getting a substantial damage award.â
That somebody is Trump, but ok
What a shocking idea! Although in New York (I am assuming thatâs where the case was filed) Iâm not so sure that a porn star would be so ill thought-of.
However, thereâs a much, much bigger problem with the case. Stormy Daniels has become a public figure, even if she wasnât before her ârelationshipâ (what a horrifying thought) with der Furor came to light. As a public figure, itâs very hard for her to defamed, at least in a way that will lead to a court decision. Trump is likely to get the case thrown out on that ground. He can also argue that he was expressing an opinion, not making a statement of facts. Given that tRump is untethered to facts, that may ring with a judge.
This is a legal analyst who has just given Avenatti a huge gift for voir dire.
I would say that Donald Trump can perhaps be defamed, in theory. But you put 12 ordinary people on a jury and say to them, âaward him money because somebody called him a liar,â I think youâd have a hard time getting a substantial damage award.
This Callan is standing on some pretty shaky assumptions. Porn is far more accepted in general than it was in the days when you couldnât watch a ton of it for free on your phone. There are procedures to make sure jurors will judge a case impartially. Stormy Daniels is a frank, funny person and a human being with a reputation to protect as a person and professional actor and director. And the weapon theyâre wielding isnât the potential for damages, itâs deposing Trump.
This case against only Trump takes it away from the NDA/payoff case situation that involves Cohen, where Cohen was able to get a delay because he would have to take the 5th rather than testify by deposition or produce documents. Trump has no such argument. Well, he does. But, for practical and political reasons, he probably wonât assert it. Avenatti just wants to get him under oath in a deposition for 2 hours and destroy the fucker.
The sooner, the better.
âStormy Daniels would have a hard time convincing a jury that President Donald Trump had caused substantial damages as a result of his alleged defamation of her, given her career.â
This lawsuit presents an interesting legal conundrum.
One party is a shameless, publicity-seeking, money-grubbing whore.
The other party, of course, is Stormy Daniels.
Thereâs a good argument to be made that a value has already been placed on harming Danielsâs reputation for veracity: $130,000 to get her to deny something which she had previously said to friends and in an interview. And when you damage someoneâs reputation without their consent the price usually goes up.
Soo âŚ
You put someone who ⌠for the MOST part âŚ
has spent their life not hiding much of ANYTHING ----
Against someone who âŚfor the MOST part âŚ
tries to hide EVERYTHING about themselves -----
Hmmmm ⌠really a toughy ⌠that one â
The reality is that Stormyâs book is full. If anything her career has been enhanced.
Donât think that line of argument will play well in front of a jury.
I guess that will depend on if itâs a jury of her peers âŚ
or made up of â regular â people ⌠wonât it â
Ask each of the potential jurors what their favorite porn site is.
If they act shocked and say they donât have one, dismiss them 'cause theyâre lying!
Otherwise thatâs juror #1 and so on.
Worth it just for the subpoenas and discovery.
LOL! Avenatti is having the time of his life.
Avenatti: 9029350237895982357
Every other idiot: 0
Which is why itâs all the more likely a jury will find in her favor, just to see the look on his face.
Any jury of 12 ordinary Americans will rule for Stormy Daniels out of spite for Dotard T rump.
In fairness to the CNN analyst (really), Avenatti had no interest in trying to explain what her special damages actually are, because the guy is at least half right.
Stormyâs damages do appear to be symbolic at best â not because she is a porn star, but because her reputation has only been enhanced by everything she is doing to drag Trumpâs activities into the light of day.
I think this lawsuit is about publicity more than damages. But that doesnât make it a stunt. Not at all.
Itâs just as serious as if she had the seven-figure claims that Trump built into his hush agreement. If sheâs right, and heâs wrong, it doesnât have to be about money. It can be about publicity â in the very best sense of the word. In fact, itâs the kind of publicity that might finally prove to Trump that not all publicity is good.