We just told him it was yet another Trump bankruptcy, since he’s so used to them…
I know that when I’m drafting a contract with an intended third party beneficiary, I always draft it so that the intended third party beneficiary is identified as a party to the contract whose signature is necessary to make it effective, who is required to provide and receive consideration deemed material by the terms of the agreement, and who is the only party given specified remedies. Because if you just identify the intended third party beneficiary as an intended third party beneficiary, there’s just too much chance that a court will misunderstand or misinterpret the language.
“Cohen Lawyer: It’s ‘Not New News’ That Trump Didn’t Know About Hush Money.”
In all fairness to Trump, there’s very little, if anything, that he actually knows.
But you certainly seem like a very competent attorney who most likely didn’t graduate from the Trump University Skool of Lawz.
Just sayin’…
So his client admits to fraud – openly and often… how soon before they’re both brought before the bar?
Honestly…these guys live in a world of their own. They think spewing nonsense will just be ‘believed’ because they said it. Man.
Speaking of “hush” – I’ll bet that Cohen wishes his lawyer would just shut up right about now.
Well to be honest, it works with a percentage of this country.
I bet $130,000 bucks that this idiot attorney left in the boilerplate language for “no third-party beneficiaries” LOL
"it’s not new news.”
It’s also not credible.
“despite Clifford and Avenatti’s attempt to drag Trump and Cohen in front of a jury.”
Wow. That seems a gratuitous and slanted way to say it. WTF is it doing in there?
Kinda like Manafort, it suddenly seems like Cohen is desperate to get under the bus as his least-bad option.
Seriously. As I said this morning, the NDA contains explicit releases from Trump. That kills the third party benny idea pretty much in its tracks (setting aside the damage a signature line does to that argument in the first place). My money is on “failure of consideration” and “fraud in the inducement”.
This is beyond bizarre; Cohen bound Stormy to an agreement that was entirely unknown to Trump. Cohen entered into a binding agreement on behalf of Trump but without Trump’s knowledge or consent. Then, Cohen coughs up 130 grand to keep Daniels quiet about something that never happened. This bullshit may play in the press, on TV and with Trump’s clueless supporters, but please tell me that this will go nowhere in front of a judge.
A show of hands- how many of you thought it was possible for Cohen to find a lawyer dumber and less competent than he is ? This is akin to " reality tv lawyers ". trying cases in federal court.
But Dr. Ronnie said he has the best brain. And is like, a smart person!
Wait, Cohen drafted a NDA and tRump didn’t know that Daniels was paid??? Yeah, I guess that’s why tRump didn’t sign it either…
Perhaps the judge will completely understand this new, novel, never-before-used, inventive meaning of 3rd party beneficiary. Oh, and to help the judge understand, he/she should order some discovery of other such Hush Agreements to which Trump was/is a party/3rd party beneficiary/unwitting or witting accomplice.
What I am not sure about is who Ms. Clifford thought she was entering to a contract with. That is to be a third party beneficiary and not a party to the contract, as I think ncsteve is saying, must be unambiguous. Or to put another way, was there fraud in the inducement to get Ms. Clifford to sign the agreement? If Ms. Clifford was deceived into signing a contract with Cohen when she thought she was signing a contract with Trump, I think it will cause the entire contract to be void.
Which brings up the discussion earlier about depositions. When (if) Trump motions to have the matter removed to arbitration in accordance with the terms of contract, Ms. Clifford will certainly challenge the legality of the contract. Hence at that time it is hard to see how Trump and Cohen avoid being deposed.
But as to Cohen specifically, my question to my fellow lawyers is how when this is all over does he keep his license? Furthermore, depending on what state has jurisdiction, there are likely state criminal penalties beyond Trump’s ability to pardon.
As I just said in another post, “fraud in the inducement” will cause the judge to allow Clifford’s side to depose Trump and Cohen before ruling on Trump’s motion to remove the case to arbitration.
But I want to again ask all my fellow attorneys, even if put in the best light that Cohen is telling the truth, are not his actions clearly unethical, so unethical in fact that disbarment proceedings against him should begin immediately, but also contain state criminal penalties that are beyond Trump’s ability to parden?