It’s fair to speculate that Fat Nixon just made a lot more enemies in the FBI and DOJ. I suspect the number of people who remain full-blown loyalists to Stupid Nixon are fewer and farther between and are likely shunned by their colleagues. Who would want to trust or rely on someone who respects and is obedient to Fat Nixon and his minions?
ETA: Just to be perfectly clear, McCabe is being fired for lying under oath. By the DOJ. Run by Sessions. Who lied repeatedly while under oath…
According to the NYT, Trump is suing Stormy Daniels for $20 million, for 20 supposed violations of the unsigned settlement agreement in an attempt to rely on the secret arbitrator’s restraining order.
"President Trump, weighing in directly on the Stephanie Clifford case for the first time, claimed in court papers filed by his lawyers on Friday that the porn actress who alleges she had an affair with him violated a confidentiality agreement at least 20 times, exposing her to damages of at least $20 million.
"President Trump’s lawyers filed two motions on Friday in United States District Court in California in a public legal fight that Ms. Clifford, whose stage name is Stormy Daniels, started last week. That’s when she sued to get out of an agreement that she had struck to be paid $130,000 to stay silent about an affair she alleges to have had with Mr. Trump starting in 2006.
“Mr. Trump formally joined his legal team’s response to Ms. Clifford’s suit in a motion, filed Friday, to move the case from state court in Los Angeles, where Ms. Clifford filed her claim, to federal court.”
A plaintiff in state court has the right to “remove” the whole case to federal court if there is a “federal question” involved. That has been the law for a very long time. His basis is the Federal Arbitration Act; federal courts are more likely (at first blush) to force the case back into arbitration. Avenatti can petition for remand to the state court. He may or may not. I would think carefully before I did for two reasons. First, I would always rather be in federal court, not state court. If the District Court hands down a decision Trump or Stormy don’t like, Trump will find himself in the Ninth Circuit for the appeal, where he is fabulously popular among the circuit judges.
A big problem is that I don’t believe the liquidated damages clause, setting damages at $1 million per occurrence is enforceable because it is punitive on its face. The court will apply the same state law to that issue as the Californiah case. The court must also hold that the clause is reasonable because the damages under the alleged probably-not-a-contract would be difficult to determine.
A second big problem for Trump is that federal courts are limited to adjudication of “cases and controversies” that do not involve political opinions. The plaintiff is the President of the United States. The court is being asked to eliminate a political problem for Trump in the guise of a bad faith contract action. Whatever damages Trump has suffered cannot be separated from his office. What is the judge supposed to say? That Trump will suffer $x because of the damage to his chances to win reelection? The federal court is much more receptive to that argument. The judge is not going to blunder into presidential politics and award $20 million from a private citizen with information to tell relevant to his fitness for office.
By personally inserting himself, Trump is rendering himself liable to discovery in federal court if the case is removed, but he loses his immediate motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that it belongs only in arbitration. I think he would lose that motion; federal judges don’t like to dismiss cases this early.
The Russian saying is that “stupid is forever.”
By this it looks like trump is admitting he had a fling with her else why the NDA? And earlier this evening Avenatti alluded to … ummmm… meetings between two scoops and Stormy
I would really like someone to ask how Stormy got this lawyer.
Trump put his own name on the lawsuit! That’s some nice chest thumping. In reality he should just bend over because stormy’s coming for him and she’s aiming for his tight little orifice
Melania is not gonna be all happiness and light this evening.
When legal beagles partake in the comments it’s always insightful and appreciated. Better than any analysis you can find elsewhere.
I have been looking to see where I saw that removal by the way. Can’t find it. I will look further, was going to post the links.
I’m not a lawyer, but as I’m writing this, I’m hearing that Trump is trying to get this case into a federal court.
Back in the 1980’s, we had a female employee try to bring a sexual harassment case into federal court.
That judge nearly had a stroke. She said, “Get this out of my court”. The plaintiff settled for pennies on the dollar.
Roughly 50/50?
EDIT: Besides the god and ware sellers , there’s the 5 or 6 already mentioned duplicate channels, plus Infowars and an RT news channel as well as some I’m simply not interested in. I already deleted most of them and have roughly 30 left.
And now this
Trump lawyers seek $20m in damages from porn star Stormy Daniels
Lawyers for US President Donald Trump are seeking $20 million (£14m) in damages from a porn actress he says broke a non-disclosure deal signed before the 2016 elections.
They argue Stormy Daniels breached the agreement at least 20 times.
The actress claims she had an affair with Mr Trump that began in 2006 and lasted several months.
The president’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, has said he paid her $130,000 of his own money to remain silent.
This is the first time President Trump has become directly involved in the case. He “vehemently denies” the alleged affair.
New Trump motto: Bullies R Us.
Did the plaintiff properly plead under federal anti-discrimination law? If so, there would be arising-under jurisdiction. (When there is congruent state law, the plaintiff is entitled to elect the forum.) What grounds did the judge find, to dismiss?
Ah. I may have missed the significance of “into.” Did the plaintiff originally file in state court, and then change her mind and seek to remove her own case to federal court? If so, she could be bound by her original choice of venue.
Another headline says The Dumpster’s lawyers say they can sue for $20Million. If I was Daniel’s lawyer I’d say bring it on. Once a suit is filed then disclosure begins and boy do I see everything about these slimes coming out into the light of day. Bet she would be the one ultimately getting the $20Million.
[quote=“stoy, post:112, topic:69687”]
By personally inserting himself, Trump is rendering himself liable to discovery in federal court if the case is removed, but he loses his immediate motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that it belongs only in arbitration.
[/quote] (my emphasis)
Not a lawyer, but the supposed reason that Cohen is trying for federal court is the greater acceptance of arbitration of federal court than state court. So Trump/Cohen are screwing themselves (no pun intended) out of arbitration by going to the feds?
The fact that this filing is now out in the open (“DONALD J. TRUMP a.k.a. DAVID DENNISON”) is a bombshell. Any way you look at it, it is now an admitted cover-up by Trump, subject to legal ramifications due to undisclosed campaign contributions.
You are right, he’s never going to get the respect of New Yorkers. But, I am so sick of depictions of naked Donald Trump and I don’t really think they are that demeaning. I think they show how people hate fat people and how many homophobes are out there.
I personally prefer the depictions of him as a whinny toddler or puppet. Those seem to really get under his skin as well.
Unreasonable to act in the interest of the client? I assumed that the fiduciary duty to clients applied before Obama changed that. We had a financial advisor who bragged about all the trips she won at work. And we subsequently realized we were contributing to her vacations and left the firm.
For any young person with the family name of “Dennison” and born after 2006, I would ask…
WHO’S YER DADDY?
