Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, January 12, 2018

Wall Street Journal: A lawyer for President Donald Trump arranged a $130,000 payment to a former adult-film star a month before the 2016 election as part of an agreement that precluded her from publicly discussing an alleged sexual encounter with Trump, according to people familiar with the matter. Michael Cohen, who spent nearly a decade as a top attorney at the Trump Organization, arranged payment to the woman, Stephanie Clifford, in October 2016 after her lawyer negotiated the nondisclosure agreement with Cohen, these people said. Clifford, whose stage name is Stormy Daniels, has privately alleged the encounter with Trump took place after they met at a July 2006 celebrity golf tournament in Lake Tahoe, these people said. Trump married Melania Trump in 2005.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The agreement with Clifford came as the Trump campaign confronted allegations from numerous women who described unwanted sexual advances and alleged assaults by Trump.

In October 2016, the Washington Post published a videotape made, but never aired, by NBC's Access Hollywood in which Mr. Trump spoke of groping women. ...

Another adult-film star, Jessica Drake, later alleged in an October 2016 news conference that Trump kissed her and two other women without permission in a hotel suite after the same 2006 golf event.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Excellent article on Trump, it details what the asshats had to go through to get pwned by a conman

sincerely

not rightoecentre

#1 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-01-12 04:07 PM | Reply

$130,00 for a story she could have sold to the National Enquirer, Vanity Fair, etc for a million?

#2 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2018-01-12 04:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Trump, Putin, Russians, and Porn

The Four Horsemen of the 2018/2020 election Apocalypse.

#3 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-01-12 04:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

But Bill Clinton 20 years ago...

-JeffJ

#4 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 04:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha... I love it. You can't make this ---- up.

#5 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-01-12 04:22 PM | Reply

Come on Sniper! Come on Fishpaw! Come on the rest of you ------- rightwingers! Tell us again how corrupt HRC was.

#6 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-01-12 04:23 PM | Reply

$130,00 for a story she could have sold to the National Enquirer, Vanity Fair, etc for a million?

#2 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

Only if he won the White House.

So $130,000 to keep quiet about a guy who might have a future in politics possibly but probably not and who will do everything he can to ruin her life if she talks... Sounds like a fair deal.

#7 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 04:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

But Obama once looked at a woman's derriere when he was in college.
JeffJ

So what? Who wouldn't want to be with that piece of a?
Humtake

I don't see proof that she was actually a porn star.
Gracieamazed

I wonder if she likes to have her toes licked?
Boaz

Gerp da derp derp, Hillary, Obama.
Sniper

#8 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2018-01-12 04:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 16 | Newsworthy 2

#7 You don't think the DNC would have doubled that offer to get that story out before the election? I am just pointing out $130,00 is a comical amount in the world of cutthroat politics on both sides.

#9 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2018-01-12 04:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#2
with his other accusers long out, unlikely.
...mb she wants more, thus the leak.

#10 | Posted by ichiro at 2018-01-12 04:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

You were the sunshine, baby, whenever you smiled
But I call you Stormy today
All of a sudden that ole rain's fallin' down
And my world is cloudy and gray
You've gone away
Oh Stormy, oh Stormy
Bring back that sunny day

Yesterday's love was like a warm summer breeze
But, like the weather ya changed
Now things are dreary, baby
And it's windy and cold
And I stand alone in the rain
Callin' your name
Oh Stormy, oh Stormy
Bring back that sunny day

Oh Stormy, oh Stormy
Bring back that sunny day

Bring back that sunny day

Oh Stormy...

-Classics IV

www.youtube.com

More of those Republican Family Values they like to brag about, I s'pose.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-12 04:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Are you not entertained?

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-12 04:41 PM | Reply

That Trump was able to negotiate her silence for such a paltry sum is evidence of his financial savvy and negotiation skills.

#13 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-01-12 04:47 PM | Reply

Questioning the amount of hush money Trump paid a PORN star is hilarious.

People now want to give extortion advice to porn stars?

LOL

#14 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-01-12 04:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

This revelation of porn star bribing may devalue Putin's blackmail material. He needs to go ahead and release that before it becomes irrelevant.... before people are so desensitized to Trump's character, or lack thereof, that it won't matter.

Oops, too late.

#15 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-12 04:47 PM | Reply

That Trump was able to negotiate her silence for such a paltry sum is evidence of his financial savvy and negotiation skills.

#13 | Posted by visitor_

Really? This is an example of his "skills"?

Because from where I sit he obviously didn't pay enough to hush this up as it is sure not hushed up very well.

#16 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-12 04:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 3

You don't think the DNC would have doubled that offer to get that story out before the election? I am just pointing out $130,00 is a comical amount in the world of cutthroat politics on both sides.
#9 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

She likely could have got more elsewhere but she also may have been reluctant to hit his campaign with the news. She is a republican who at one point publicly considered a primary challenge against David Vitter for his House seat.

This is speculation on my part but could it be that the agreement included a clause that Trump would endorse her for office should she decide to run at some point in the future.

#17 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2018-01-12 04:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#7 You don't think the DNC would have doubled that offer to get that story out before the election? I am just pointing out $130,00 is a comical amount in the world of cutthroat politics on both sides.

#9 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

The DNC would have had to KNOW about it to offer her that kind of money.

And he was expected to lose, heavily. Her story would have been worthless after he lost.

Honestly, whats wrong with you?

#18 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 04:58 PM | Reply

I don't see proof that she was actually a porn star.
Gracieamazed

#8 | POSTED BY MONTECORE

You basically called this one...

#19 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 04:58 PM | Reply

That Trump was able to negotiate her silence for such a paltry sum is evidence of his financial savvy and negotiation skills.

#13 | Posted by visitor_

Really? This is an example of his "skills"?

Because from where I sit he obviously didn't pay enough to hush this up as it is sure not hushed up very well.

#16 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-12 04:50 PM | Reply | Flag:
| Newsworthy 1

I think that was Visitor's attempt at humor.

#20 | Posted by cbob at 2018-01-12 04:59 PM | Reply

Donald J. Trump: A quality individual.

LOW quality, but quality.

#21 | Posted by cbob at 2018-01-12 05:00 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

LOW quality, but quality.

#21 | Posted by cbob

Hey now! Give the Manchild a break!

He is just like us!

I mean who among us hasn't paid hush money to porn star?

#22 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-12 05:03 PM | Reply

"I'm a great Christian, AND I AM"...Donie Tic Tacs, faithful husband of Melania, Marla, Ivana.

Such a low life scumbag.

He is the face and the ass of the Republican Party.

#23 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2018-01-12 05:04 PM | Reply

Please tell me this is a Trump story that doesn't have "---- hole" in it...

#24 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-01-12 05:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 6

It never really dawned on any of us that there might be more than just one '-------------' tape out there. With a sordid perv like Trump, who the hell knows what other Trump home movies are floating around.

#25 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-01-12 05:06 PM | Reply

Does anyone think that any Republican in Congress or SCOTUS cares about anything other than protecting their Trump? Compared to Bill's BJ, the contrast in Republican actions will be nothing short of spectacular. Take a moment from your busy day to thank Monica for saving our Social Security, for about 20 years.

#26 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-12 05:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

At least it wasn't a child this time.

#27 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-01-12 05:08 PM | Reply

National Enquirer Shielded Donald Trump From Playboy Model's Affair Allegation

Tabloid owner American Media agreed to pay $150,000 for story from 1998 Playmate of the Year, but hasn't published her account

www.wsj.com

Trump is so lucky to have such good friends in the trashy media.

#28 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-12 05:11 PM | Reply

That Trump was able to negotiate her silence for such a paltry sum is evidence of his financial savvy and negotiation skills.
#13 | Posted by visitor_
Really? This is an example of his "skills"?
Because from where I sit he obviously didn't pay enough to hush this up as it is sure not hushed up very well.
#16 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-12 04:50 PM | Reply | Flag:
| Newsworthy 1
I think that was Visitor's attempt at humor.
#20 | POSTED BY CBOB

Sadly, he probably meant it entirely.

#29 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 05:11 PM | Reply

#18 No he was only expected to lose by people like you and CNN. There is nothing wrong with me. If she was hustling a payout she would have shopped around for the paycheck. I gave #17 a NW flag as possibility to what may or may not have happened.

#30 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2018-01-12 05:15 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I think that was Visitor's attempt at humor.
#20 | POSTED BY CBOB

Sadly, he probably meant it entirely.

#29 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 05:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Well, that possibility did cross my mind.

#31 | Posted by cbob at 2018-01-12 05:18 PM | Reply

#16

I'm the funny flag... ohmigod.... that's the funniest ish I've ever seen.... ROTHDFLMBAO!

Donnerboy: "Negotiating Skillz? Obviously boy didn't pay enough cause the ish ain't hushed, is it?"

#32 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-01-12 05:21 PM | Reply

$130,00 for a story she could have sold to the National Enquirer, Vanity Fair, etc for a million?

#2 | Posted by gracieamazed

Maybe she was made an offer she couldn't refuse?

#33 | Posted by Zed at 2018-01-12 05:22 PM | Reply

If she was hustling a payout she would have shopped around for the paycheck.

#30 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2018-01-12 05:15 PMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

If that's what she was doing. You can't think of any other scenario here?

#34 | Posted by Zed at 2018-01-12 05:25 PM | Reply

#33: Vito Corleone offered a famous bandleader $10,000 to let his godson, crooner Johnny Fontaine out of a personal service contract. The famous bandleader refused. The next day Vito Corleone went back and visited the famous bandleader, but this time he was accompanied by Luca Brasi. At that time the famous bandleader accepted a certified check for $1000 and the personal service contract was canceled. Don Corleone made the famous bandleader an offer he could not refuse.

#35 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-01-12 05:29 PM | Reply

$130,00 for a story she could have sold to the National Enquirer, Vanity Fair, etc for a million?

The National Enquirer doesn't buy Trump stories to run. It buys them to bury the story and serve his interests.

#36 | Posted by rcade at 2018-01-12 05:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Please tell me this is a Trump story that doesn't have "---- hole" in it...

#24 | Posted by Alexandrite

I dunno... for $130,000 I think maybe I would want access to ALL the holes.

Just sayin...

#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-12 05:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

As a porn star her job offers probably tripled. Have you seen her picture. Ugh! Donald married up a couple notches.

#38 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-01-12 05:40 PM | Reply

#18 No he was only expected to lose by people like you and CNN. There is nothing wrong with me. If she was hustling a payout she would have shopped around for the paycheck. I gave #17 a NW flag as possibility to what may or may not have happened.

#30 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

Are you sure? Are you really sure there is nothing wrong with you?

The polls said he was going to lose. It sounds like Donald thought he was going to lose.

Here's the issue: The story is worthless if he loses.

And if she sells it before then, he crushes her life and sues her for defamation. The attorneys fees alone eat up any money she made from selling it.

She did the smart thing, probably with an attorney on her side, to take the money and a confidentiality agreement to protect herself.

#39 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 05:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

October 2016 was her last chance. Trump had already run every single woman who came out against him through the wringer, nothing stuck. She'd be just another who's story would be denied by Trump. She obviously had evidence beyond just her word. I don't have WSJ access so I could only read the first paragraphs. And even with the evidence, how long would it be before Trump's machine would have had a counter argument (Trump alibi of never being wherever, whenever, by trotting out witnesses, stories etc., which takes us to "she's a liar and staged the whole thing") throwing doubt? Hard to believe Trump's attorney's weren't applying pressure based upon the timing, but maybe not. We'll probably find out if this story has legs.

The fact she got $130,000 out of Trump at the precise time she did is itself evidence of her allegations based upon his repeated public refusals to ever back down - even though he often does based upon settlements such as these.

#40 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-01-12 05:48 PM | Reply

So, of only Al Franken had known, he could have paid off the women who claimed he did anything to them and then it would have made it ok for him to remain in office serving his constituents.

#41 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-12 05:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Maybe she was made an offer she couldn't refuse?

#33 | POSTED BY ZED

Blowtard?

Oops, backwards.

#42 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-01-12 05:56 PM | Reply

Polls? Oh my because they are a clear reflection of accuracy? Yep you rely on those polls on 2020 and see where that gets you.

#43 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2018-01-12 05:58 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Maybe she was made an offer she couldn't refuse?

That was my thought.

She accepted the $130K more as a consolation prize than a sufficient payout because to do otherwise may have meant very very bad things for her life.

#44 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-12 06:01 PM | Reply

Typical Trump:

"After the agreement, Ms. Clifford's camp complained the payment wasn't being made quickly enough and threatened to cancel the deal, some of the people familiar with the matter said."

www.msn.com

#45 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 06:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Polls? Oh my because they are a clear reflection of accuracy?" - #43 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2018-01-12 05:58 PM

One last look: 2016 polls actually got a lot right

[snip] Of the 13 final national polls conducted the week before the election that tested the four-way presidential contest, only one had Trump ahead and 12 put Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on top.

That would seem to be a veritable disaster for the polling industry, right?

Not exactly.

National polls only measure the popular vote. Clinton did, in fact, win the national popular vote by 2.1 points. The average of the 13 final national polls had Clinton ahead by 3.1 points, which was only a point off the actual result.

It Wasn't the Polls That Missed, It Was the Pundits

[snip] In fact, despite the hue and cry, the national polls were actually a touch better in 2016 than in 2012. Four years ago, the final RCP National Average gave President Obama a 0.7-point lead; he won by 3.9 points, for an error of 3.2 points. The final RCP Four-Way National Poll Average showed Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote by 3.3 points. She will probably win the popular vote by a point or so, which would equate to an error of around two points.

The 2016 national polls are looking less wrong after final election tallies

[snip] Clinton won the national popular vote by two percentage points according to certified vote tallies compiled by David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report. Most individual surveys found Clinton holding a small single-digit edge over Trump, averaging to a three-point margin. Looking across individual national polls, the average difference from the final Clinton-Trump vote margin is 2.2 percentage points, much smaller than the level of error apparent when they were compared to preliminary vote results (3.4 points).

It helps to know what you're talking about before clicking on the Publish Comment button, gracie.

You'll look a lot less stupid that way.

#46 | Posted by Hans at 2018-01-12 06:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Ms. Clifford has appeared in about 150 adult films, and was considered among the industry's biggest stars when the then-27-year-old met Mr. Trump"

I can't wait to see how the conservative Christians who love Trump are going to rationalize this.

#47 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 06:13 PM | Reply

Well, as Patton Oswalt said, at least Trump finally paid one of his subcontractors.

#48 | Posted by cbob at 2018-01-12 06:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"I can't wait to see how the conservative Christians who love Trump are going to rationalize this." - #47 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 06:13 PM

Especially LD Pence (Lap Dog Pence).

I understand that if he's early to a restaurant Pence has the waitress remove Mrs. Butterworth from the table until Mrs. Pence arrives.

#49 | Posted by Hans at 2018-01-12 06:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

The event where Daniels and Trump reportedly did the deed is the same place where another porn star previously claimed that Trump grabbed her and kissed her without consent and offered her $10K for sex.
www.usmagazine.com

#50 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2018-01-12 06:17 PM | Reply

#50

Isn't Trump on the record saying that she to was lying and that he never did what she said?

This must bolster his case... bwwwaaaaahhhh!

#51 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-01-12 06:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Ol Bill paid a lot of hush money.......it's proven that Liberals are okay with this

#52 | Posted by Maverick at 2018-01-12 06:33 PM | Reply

The porn star is denying the payment took place.

"If anything like this actually happened, you wouldn't have learned about it from the media; you would have learned about it by reading my book...Mr. Trump was cordial and treated me with nothing but respect." [Paraphrasing]

#53 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-01-12 06:35 PM | Reply

She denies it, but this is what the WSJ is reporting:

After the agreement, Ms. Clifford's camp complained the payment wasn't being made quickly enough and threatened to cancel the deal, some of the people familiar with the matter said.

The payment was made to Ms. Clifford through her lawyer in the matter, Keith Davidson, with funds sent to Mr. Davidson's client-trust account at City National Bank in Los Angeles, according to the people.

www.msn.com

#54 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 06:43 PM | Reply

Evangelicals speak out about porn often enough, so if this story gains traction, it will be interesting to see how they react to their God-sanctioned president sleeping with a popular porn star and then paying her hush money.

#56 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 06:47 PM | Reply

don't worry guys, the righties will show up after fox news tells them the proper deflection points.

#57 | Posted by klifferd at 2018-01-12 06:48 PM | Reply

#55

It's a good thing that Trump has such loyal Deflectors and Obfuscators on this thread.

#58 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-12 06:48 PM | Reply

"The fact that Bill Clinton paid-off Paula Jones for a mere $850,000 has nothing to do with this thread."

It really doesn't. I don't remember liberals calling for a day of prayer and fasting to protect Bill Clinton from impeachment.

#59 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 06:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Ol Bill paid a lot of hush money.......it's proven that Liberals are okay with this

#52 | POSTED BY MAVERICK

As we forgot to add this idiot to the list of people dumping garbage onto this thread.

Love the 20 year old deflection though. And if you can find some actual proof that Clinton paid hush money, you're welcome to post your own thread on it.

#60 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 06:51 PM | Reply

#55 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

There's liars. There's huge liars. And then there is you and Trump. Idiots flock together apparently.

Clinton never paid hush money to Paula Jones. If you had two brain cells to rub together, you'd know this.

#61 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 06:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I can't wait to see how the conservative Christians who love Trump are going to rationalize this."
#47 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday

They will do what they always do: Ignore it.

Also, Conservative Christian is an oxymoron.

#62 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 06:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#55 | Posted by nullifidian

That wasn't "hush money". It was a settlement in a very public lawsuit.

Or were you too stoned at that time to know that it was paid in exchange for her agreement to drop the appeal?

#63 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-12 06:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Tabloids are in bed with Trump.

No chance to sell a story to them that makes trump look bad.

#64 | Posted by Tor at 2018-01-12 06:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#55 | Posted by nullifidian
That wasn't "hush money". It was a settlement in a very public lawsuit.
Or were you too stoned at that time to know that it was paid in exchange for her agreement to drop the appeal?
#63 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

He know he is too busy with his romantic Trump fan-fiction to look stuff up.

#65 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 07:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You know rather

#66 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 07:00 PM | Reply

Its a shame after such a sordid past no man will ever sleep with her again, and she did porn.

#67 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-01-12 07:03 PM | Reply

"Polls? Oh my because they are a clear reflection of accuracy? Yep you rely on those polls on 2020 and see where that gets you."

So sick of your posts, Trump didn't win the election, it was stolen through Interstate Crosscheck which now the administration has moved to Homeland Security so that their methods can't be strutinized. And you seem to be just fine with that. Your posts about polls, etc. are crap. You can't defend the last election nor your corrupt candidate.

#68 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-12 07:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Its a shame after such a sordid past no man will ever sleep with her again, and she did porn."

You know better than that.

#69 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-12 07:04 PM | Reply

#70 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

I'm not sure I see the relevance... I doubt anyone else does either.

You should lay off the drugs.

#71 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-12 07:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"I remember a progressive MSM pundit/feminist saying this: "I'd be happy to give him [Bill Clinton] a ------- just to thank him for keeping abortion legal."

That pundits name?
AndreaMackris.
"And now you know the rest of the story."

#72 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-12 07:19 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Sometimes Conservatives pick a man to lead us all.......

Where are the calls for us to heed their wisdom? They have been quiet for a minute.....

#73 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-12 07:25 PM | Reply

#70 did you mail her your receipts for donations for pp? Mighty good memory you have of that sentence. Jealousy is a mfer.

#74 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-12 07:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bannon on Trump's female problem in Fire and Fury:

Michelle Goldberg‏ @michelleinbklyn

This sentence from the Wolff book didn't get the attention it deserved

"Look Kasowitz has known him for twenty-five years. Kasowitz has gotten him out of all kinds of jams. Kasowitz on the campaign--what did we have, a hundred women? Kasowitz took care of them all."

twitter.com

A hundred women smacks of hyperbole, but it sure sounds like more than 18.

#75 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 07:49 PM | Reply

Trump didn't win the election, it was stolen through Interstate Crosscheck ...

Clinton campaign general counsel, Marc Elias, disagrees. www.drudge.com And my prediction in that post holds true.

... which now the administration has moved to Homeland Security so that their methods can't be strutinized.
#68 | Posted by danni

No, the administration has not. www.documentcloud.org See also www.huffingtonpost.com

#76 | Posted by et_al at 2018-01-12 08:00 PM | Reply

Now the Trump has sunk the dignity of the Presidency to the level of porn ...

Trump's next stop -- ----------.

#77 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-01-12 08:05 PM | Reply

Et_Al we're still waiting on the names on that CrossCheck list.
when are you going to provide that?

#78 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-12 08:11 PM | Reply

Nulli, you really should consider retiring from this site. You're embarrassing yourself every time you post.

#79 | Posted by cbob at 2018-01-12 08:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Porn Star: Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels Invited Me to Their Hotel Room

‘I ended up with Donald in his hotel room. Picture him chasing me around his hotel room in his tighty-whities,' Stormy Daniels told fellow porn star Alana Evans.

"Stormy calls me... with Donald [Trump] and I can hear him, and he's talking through the phone to me saying, ‘Oh come on Alana, let's have some fun! Let's have some fun! Come to the party, we're waiting for you.'"

www.thedailybeast.com

#81 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 08:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#78

He's utterly demolished that Crosscheck crap more times than I can count.

You must be a gluttton for punishment.

#83 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-12 08:56 PM | Reply

Brian Stelter‏ @brianstelter

Two ABC News sources confirm: Porn star Stephanie Clifford was in touch with @GMA producers in the fall of 2016 about a potential interview. Here's our full story...www.cnn.com

#84 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 09:50 PM | Reply

Mrs. Betty Bowers‏
@BettyBowers
Follow Follow @BettyBowers
More
Dear #MAGA Conservative Christians:

Yesterday, Donald Trump taught your kids the word --------.

Today, he introduced them to naughty delights of googling something called Stormy Daniels!

How's that #FamilyValues votin' workin' out for ya?

#85 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-01-12 09:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Honestly, is Mrs. Mike Pence good with all of this? I can't see how she would be.

#86 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 10:13 PM | Reply

"But Bill Clinton 20 years ago..."

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Anyone who thinks they can take Trump down with this will fail even more badly than the Republicans did back then with Clinton.

#87 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-01-12 10:40 PM | Reply

Who here thinks this will bring Trump down? I don't. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy the show.

#88 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-12 11:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Who here thinks this will bring Trump down?

I don't. donald is the president... he's pretty much bulletproof, just as the founding fathers intended.

#89 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-01-12 11:38 PM | Reply

"He's utterly demolished that Crosscheck crap more times than I can count. "

No, he really hasn't.

He can't tell me who CrossCheck has on their list, and how that information was used after it arrived on the Secretary of State's desk.

Nobody in Et_Al's poistion can tell me that. Because The information is not subject to legal discovery.

I hope you get that. He does.

#90 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-12 11:49 PM | Reply

You're doubling down on pain. You do realize Crosscheck doesn't remove a single person from voting eligibility, right? You do realize that any voter corrections based upon Crosscheck info has been certified and overseen and signed off on by organizations like the ACLU, right?

I'm guessing not.

#91 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-13 12:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You do realize that any voter corrections based upon Crosscheck info has been certified and overseen and signed off on by organizations like the ACLU, right?

Not exactly correct but a fair assumption based on the fact that in several lawsuits brought by the ACLU, NAACP, LWV and DEMOS, among other voting rights warriors, they have never, to my knowledge, sued Crosscheck. That includes a case pending in the SC regarding OH, a Crosscheck participant, voter list maintenance. The case was argued a couple days ago. In none of the district court, 6th Circuit and SC documents and briefing as well as the argument transcript is Crosscheck mentioned. Not even once. Ever.

To be fair, I'm aware of one suit that sought an injunction against a state, I don't remember which, using Crosscheck. Danni was ecstatic when she ran across it, "Ha Ha, I got you." But she didn't read it. The injunction was denied and the case never went any further. It died on the vine just like the the PA ACLU Crosscheck investigation several years ago. There is also pending a case in Illinois that has to do with a very specific and narrow issue regarding a recently amended statute. The plaintiff seeks an injunction against the state using Crosscheck in the manner permitted by the statute. Based on the limited information available, I agree with the plaintiffs. That case was filed several months ago. Beyond the complaint and request for injunction nothing on the case has been done. In neither case was Crosscheck a named party.

#92 | Posted by et_al at 2018-01-13 02:43 AM | Reply

#90

You're right, pos troll. I cannot "name" the 12-20 million ineligible voters alleged by the Carter Ford Election Commission, the Carter Baker Election Commission, the Obama Election Commission, Pew Research and the Brennan Center to clog up the voter rolls. Nor can I "name" any voter on any Crosscheck data match list. Nor can I "name" any voter, rightly or wrongly, struck off using a Crosscheck data match list beginning point or any other legal means or method. Why, you will ask. It's not publicly available information, I answer. Why, you will ask. It's a matter of state and federal law, I answer. Why, you will ask. Go read the f-----g constitution on state control of the "time, place and manner" of elections, I answer.

To get to your real point, I don't doubt that state and federally mandated and regulated voter list maintenance utilizing various means and methods, including Crosscheck, sometimes screws over eligible voters, at least as reported anecdotally.

Can you answer Justice Breyer's question Wednesday – What's a state to do?

#93 | Posted by et_al at 2018-01-13 04:16 AM | Reply

Have there been any reports as to where the $130,000 came from? Trump's personal account? Trump Foundation? Campaign Funds?

#94 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2018-01-13 06:34 AM | Reply

he's pretty much bulletproof, just as the founding fathers intended.

We have a person elected for the primary purpose of stepping in as president and never even consider the option. That's pretty messed up when the president is doing everything he can to prove himself a mentally unstable person with no impulse control. This country and the world will be lucky to survive Trump.

#95 | Posted by rcade at 2018-01-13 09:26 AM | Reply

That's pretty messed up when the president is doing everything he can to prove himself a mentally unstable person with no impulse control.

#95 | POSTED BY RCADE

I don't think it is intentional. I think he really is a criminal, a liar, completely incompetent, completely immoral and mentally unstable. He's definitely not trying to appear that way. If he were, he wouldn't lie about all the proof to the contrary.

#96 | Posted by kudzu at 2018-01-13 10:06 AM | Reply

NYT's reporting that they have seen text messages between Stormy and the editor of Slate regarding her desire to go public about Trump because he was late in paying her off:

The reported payment came shortly before the presidential election and as the actress, Stephanie Clifford, 38, was discussing sharing her account with ABC's "Good Morning America" and the online magazine Slate, according to interviews, notes and text messages reviewed by The New York Times.

Jacob Weisberg, editor-in-chief of the Slate Group, said on Friday that in a series of interviews with Ms. Clifford in August and October 2016, she told him she had an affair with Mr. Trump after meeting him at a 2006 celebrity golf tournament. She told him that Michael D. Cohen, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, had agreed during the presidential campaign to pay her the $130,000 if she kept the relationship secret, Mr. Weisberg said, adding that Ms. Clifford had told him she was tempted to go public because the lawyer was late in making the payment and she feared he might back out of their agreement.

www.nytimes.com

Stormy also provided a draft amendment to what she said was the contract between her and Trump in which pseudonyms were used for both parties.

#97 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-01-13 10:19 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Are we finally reaching a point where his base runs from him?

He is truly testing his limits, IMO.

#98 | Posted by eberly at 2018-01-13 10:33 AM | Reply

Could be true as, after all, he was a democrat back then ;)

#99 | Posted by MSgt at 2018-01-13 02:16 PM | Reply

"You do realize Crosscheck doesn't remove a single person from voting eligibility, right? "

Of course I realize that.

You do realize the Secretary of State removes people from voting eligibility, people whose names are on the CrossCheck list, right?

#100 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 04:14 PM | Reply

"Not exactly correct but a fair assumption based on the fact that in several lawsuits brought by the ACLU, NAACP, LWV and DEMOS, among other voting rights warriors, they have never, to my knowledge, sued Crosscheck."

How do you sue a list?

#101 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 04:15 PM | Reply

" In none of the district court, 6th Circuit and SC documents and briefing as well as the argument transcript is Crosscheck mentioned. "

You're really big into playing the "absence of evidence is evidence of absence" game.

#102 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 04:16 PM | Reply

"Nor can I "name" any voter, rightly or wrongly, struck off using a Crosscheck data match list beginning point or any other legal means or method. "

Then how can you be so sure it didn't happen, wrongly?

#103 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 04:16 PM | Reply

"Why, you will ask. It's not publicly available information, I answer."

Right, which is why I said:

Nobody in Et_Al's poistion can tell me that. Because The information is not subject to legal discovery.
#90 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

#104 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 04:18 PM | Reply

Well, it's been a fun, productive discussion.
I think we all learned a lot about CrossCheck.

#105 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 07:36 PM | Reply

Trump's next stop -- ----------.

#77 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-01-12 08:05 PM

That's what Melania's been up to.

#106 | Posted by morris at 2018-01-13 11:37 PM | Reply

And people doubted that trickle down was real, just ask Ms Clifford.

#107 | Posted by bored at 2018-01-14 12:09 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort