Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#851

Post by RVInit » Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:15 pm

RoadScholar wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:10 pm
Mikedunford wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:08 pm
#basta
much ado wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:54 pm
However, in Swedish it means to "sit in a sauna", but that's probably not what Mike meant.
Same root as the word "baste?" :shock:
:winner:


"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#852

Post by RVInit » Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:25 pm

RoadScholar wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:07 pm
Not necessarily a hero, but certainly a blessing.
Yes. I watch Avenatti with as much amusement as anything else. I may report something I see or hear of him, but that doesn't mean I am promoting it, believing it, or anything else. It just means this is what I heard him say. Period.

Who knows if he had anything whatsoever to do with shining a light on Cohen. My personal suspicion is most likely not. From what I understand it was the bank that flagged at least one transaction having to do with the Stormy payoff, and I would bet that is what actually got law enforcement involved, not Stormy and her lawyer. But, it's still fun watching the antics on the teevee. Anenatti sure believes he is some kinda superman. IANAL and would bet the IAALs are way more cognizant of the supreme incompetence on both sides (notwithstanding the woman who has written some of the "papers"). But even as a non-lawyer I can appreciate the humor and horror of watching this awful competition between clowns and jokers. Watching these clowns makes the high quality of lawyers on this forum even more obvious. :blink:


"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
woodworker
Posts: 2478
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:54 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#853

Post by woodworker » Thu Apr 12, 2018 2:32 pm

Much as I am not impressed with Avennati as an attorney, I do think that he and Ms. Clifford have helped to bring some of these issues regarding Trump into the sunlight. I also think that Ms. Clifford's action prompted Ms. McDougal to enter the fray and has helped to focus more attention on Michael Cohen's involvement as Trump's fixer, leading to a greater scrutiny of Cohen and all the shit in which he is involved. I view Clifford/Avennati not as the bug exterminator but as someone who helped to turn the rock over.


Pence / Haley -- 2020 "I Won't Call Her Mother" and "We Will Be The Best Team Ever, But Never Alone Together"

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43773
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#854

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Apr 12, 2018 2:35 pm

woodworker wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 2:32 pm
Much as I am not impressed with Avennati as an attorney, I do think that he and Ms. Clifford have helped to bring some of these issues regarding Trump into the sunlight. I also think that Ms. Clifford's action prompted Ms. McDougal to enter the fray and has helped to focus more attention on Michael Cohen's involvement as Trump's fixer, leading to a greater scrutiny of Cohen and all the shit in which he is involved. I view Clifford/Avennati not as the bug exterminator but as someone who helped to turn the rock over.
:yeah:



User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#855

Post by RVInit » Thu Apr 12, 2018 2:42 pm

Do you think he turned over the rock as far as the general public is concerned or also put law enforcement attention on him? I was speaking about law enforcement when I said I suspect that Avennati didn't have much to do with putting the spotlight on Cohen. Maybe I am wrong about that.


"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 7428
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#856

Post by Orlylicious » Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:41 pm

Time Magazine cover:

Time.JPG

Avenatti is going to be on Deadline White House with Niccole Wallace next on MSNBC. 4:40pm EDT


Michael said that he learned in the last hour or two that Cohen is going to file an emergency motion tomorrow to stay the case because he's going to plead the Fifth to all the questions in connection with his criminal investigations. They're going to oppose the stay. Michael's reminding people that Donald's said people only plead the Fifth when they're guilty. (Updated after Stern posted)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43773
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#857

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:45 pm

Cohen is going to court tomorrow to seek an emergency stay because he plans to assert his right against self-incrimination. Clearly, his lawyers called the Chin for a meet and confer. The Chin is a bit evasive about why he knows on Nicole Wallace's show. But that's why he knows.



User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 2256
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#858

Post by Dan1100 » Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:47 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:45 pm
Cohen is going to court tomorrow to seek an emergency stay because he plans to assert his right against self-incrimination. Clearly, his lawyers called the Chin for a meet and confer. The Chin is a bit evasive about why he knows on Nicole Wallace's show. But that's why he knows.
I called that one.


"I asked Osama bin Laden and he very strongly said that he had nothing to do with crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. I don't see any reason it would be Al-Qaeda."

-George W. Bush

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#859

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:18 pm

Poor Judge Otero.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43773
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#860

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:33 pm

Mikedunford wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:18 pm
Poor Judge Otero.
Nah. Send the first claim to arbitration and rule on the second claim without discovery. Get it all off your bench.

The arbitrator and the Ninth Circuit can then sort everything out.



andersweinstein
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2018 4:34 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#861

Post by andersweinstein » Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:39 pm



Anyone notice, the expression is "fold like a cheap suit." What does it mean to "fold like a cheap deck of cards"?



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43773
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#862

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:44 pm

Stipulation re briefing schedule on Cohen's anticipated ex parte.

Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.



User avatar
vic
Posts: 3521
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:36 am
Location: The great San Fernando Valley
Occupation: Web developer

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#863

Post by vic » Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:02 pm

andersweinstein wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:39 pm


Anyone notice, the expression is "fold like a cheap suit." What does it mean to "fold like a cheap deck of cards"?
Language Log had a post on that a couple of days ago: Folding like all the things



User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 15564
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#864

Post by Suranis » Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:39 pm

andersweinstein wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:39 pm
Anyone notice, the expression is "fold like a cheap suit." What does it mean to "fold like a cheap deck of cards"?
Its probably from Poker. If you have a bad hand and you cant bluff, then you fold rather than lose more money.

*edit* Or what my esteemed colleague said above.


"The devil...the prowde spirite...cannot endure to be mocked.” - Thomas Moore

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#865

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:41 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:33 pm
Mikedunford wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:18 pm
Poor Judge Otero.
Nah. Send the first claim to arbitration and rule on the second claim without discovery. Get it all off your bench.

The arbitrator and the Ninth Circuit can then sort everything out.
Second claim, sure. The allegedly defamatory statement isn't defamatory. That's a slam-dunk, and it doesn't change even if Cohen goes to jail tomorrow.

First claim, I don't know. A stay pending the resolution of the criminal investigation would arguably prejudice Clifford. And if Clifford gets the benefit of adverse inferences from Cohen's refusal to answer questions about the contract -- I just don't know. Only thing I'm sure of is that I'd hate to be the one who has to do the research on this for the judge.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43773
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#866

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:44 pm

I think we're overthinking this because we are afraid to use Occam's razor.

These facts are undisputed: Cohen signed on behalf of Essential Consultants, LLC. Stormy signed on behalf of herself. Somebody paid Daniels $130,000 and Daniels took it.

I think that's sufficient for contract formation. All the defenses to enforcement and the claims concerning breach are remitted to arbitration, where contract interpretation (including what "and/or" means) is also an issue.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43773
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#867

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:52 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:44 pm
Stipulation re briefing schedule on Cohen's anticipated ex parte.

Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
SO ORDERED.

For a case that's not important, Judge Otero is keeping up with the attorneys.

The order is too large to attach (the insertion of the judge's signature made the document too big), but it is available here as document no. 37: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63 ... er_by=desc



User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 2256
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#868

Post by Dan1100 » Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:54 pm

While the lawyers clean up all details, actor/producer/show runner Avenatti does his thing.
Manu Raju Verified account @mkraju
14m14 minutes ago

Stormy Daniels’ attorney @MichaelAvenatti claims on @CNNSitRoom someone asked him not to release the sketch of the person who allegedly threatened Stormy. Request made in the aftermath of the Michael Cohen raid. He said he is “not at liberty” to say who made the request and why


"I asked Osama bin Laden and he very strongly said that he had nothing to do with crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. I don't see any reason it would be Al-Qaeda."

-George W. Bush

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 26024
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#869

Post by Foggy » Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:00 pm

So wait ... Michael Cohen wrote this NDA - and paid $130,000 out of his own pocket - in order to silence my gal Stormy, and as of today the only person who's really silenced is Michael Cohen?

My irony meter is feeling much better, thank you. :mrgreen:


Hopefully, this will blossom into a snowball.
WWG1WGA

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#870

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:24 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:44 pm
I think we're overthinking this because we are afraid to use Occam's razor.

These facts are undisputed: Cohen signed on behalf of Essential Consultants, LLC. Stormy signed on behalf of herself. Somebody paid Daniels $130,000 and Daniels took it.

I think that's sufficient for contract formation. All the defenses to enforcement and the claims concerning breach are remitted to arbitration, where contract interpretation (including what "and/or" means) is also an issue.
Yeahbut -

Arbitrability isn't just formation. The question of whether the dispute falls within the arbitration clause is a matter for the court, unless the parties explicitly agreed to arbitrate matters of arbitrability. Which is why all the model arbitration clauses that the arbitration industry provides include arbitrability. But Cohen didn't explicitly include that in the clause he drafted.
Edit: And whether the party seeking arbitration can seek arbitration is part of the arbtirabiltiy inquiry. If Clifford is entitled to adverse inferences from Cohen taking the 5th? I just don't know.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

andersweinstein
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2018 4:34 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#871

Post by andersweinstein » Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:38 pm

vic wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:02 pm
andersweinstein wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:39 pm

Anyone notice, the expression is "fold like a cheap suit." What does it mean to "fold like a cheap deck of cards"?
Language Log had a post on that a couple of days ago: Folding like all the things
.....................................................................:like: :like: :like:



andersweinstein
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2018 4:34 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#872

Post by andersweinstein » Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:11 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:44 pm
I think we're overthinking this because we are afraid to use Occam's razor.

These facts are undisputed: Cohen signed on behalf of Essential Consultants, LLC. Stormy signed on behalf of herself. Somebody paid Daniels $130,000 and Daniels took it.

I think that's sufficient for contract formation. All the defenses to enforcement and the claims concerning breach are remitted to arbitration, where contract interpretation (including what "and/or" means) is also an issue.
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.



User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 2256
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#873

Post by Dan1100 » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:57 am

So, as before, The Chin has a lousy lawsuit, but a great TV show. The goal isn't to win, the goal is to stay on the air.

Now, Cohen has to take the 5th and wants to stay proceedings.

What is the best thing for the Stormy and the Chin TV show? The best thing is that Cohen gets his stay. Then Avenatti gets to keep pounding on Cohen day after day, week after week, while Cohen can't defend himself. He gets to pile on with new lawsuits and additional plaintiffs, if he's really got them.

It is going to be hard to tell because his legal work has been so mediocre, but I think The Chin is going to do his best "don't throw me in the briar patch" while hoping Cohen gets his stay.
Michael AvenattiVerified account @MichaelAvenatti
56m56 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/sta ... 6675129344
In last 18 mos, Mr. Cohen negotiated yet another hush NDA, this time on behalf of a prominent GOP donor who had a relationship with a LA woman, impregnated her and then made sure she had an abortion. The deal provided for multiple payments across many months. #basta
431 replies 2,038 retweets 4,011 likes


"I asked Osama bin Laden and he very strongly said that he had nothing to do with crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. I don't see any reason it would be Al-Qaeda."

-George W. Bush

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 26024
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#874

Post by Foggy » Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:38 am

He keeps trying to use the hashtag #pasta and he consistently misses by one letter. It comes from the old Russian saying, "Don't hang noodles on my ears," which means "Don't bullshit me." I use that at the end of all my tweets. :nope: He stole it from me. :liar: In Swedish it means "blonde with big wheels". #pasta


Hopefully, this will blossom into a snowball.
WWG1WGA

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43773
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#875

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:09 am

andersweinstein wrote:The threshold question is not whether there is a facially valid contract. It's whether there can be no dispute over whether the parties DD and PP made an agreement to arbitrate
I disagree. I think the question for the judge is whether there is prima facie evidence that Daniels made an agreement to arbitrate with Dennison, not whether Dennison was a party to that agreement. If so, I continue to predict Judge Otero will send this mess to arbitration.

If Trump and Cohen weren't so bullheaded, if they had any sense of self preservation, they would have capitulated and agreed that Daniels could do what she has already done. But I suspect they are afraid that if they give up that will lead to a torrent of other agreements and other silenced women seeking to tell their stories. Good decision-making has never been a particular strength of Trump.



Post Reply

Return to “Trump Administration”