From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com>
Subject: Re: CNN: CNN says whore Daniels deserves "fairer treatment" (everyonegroan in unison)
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx04.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: CNN: CNN says whore Daniels deserves "fairer treatment" (everyone
groan in unison)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
References: <3df67819-0b2c-43fe-803f-81301f85172c@googlegroups.com>
<2tqdnQ2jlcquKTzHnZ2dnUU7-WvNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2tqdnQ2jlcquKTzHnZ2dnUU7-WvNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <P%ioC.130299$qc.101561@fx04.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 22:42:55 UTC
Organization: http://www.NewsDemon.com
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:42:55 -0600
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2651194033
X-Received-Bytes: 2816
Print Article
Forward Article
On 3/8/18 4:07 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> RichA<rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> She blackmailed Trump to pay her money, Daniel's (or whatever the whore's
>> real name is) probably wants to cash-in with a book (unlikely to be
>> written by a whore, but ghost-written) and go on the talk-show circuit.
>> Meanwhile, IF she was with Trump, it's pretty sure bet she got paid for
>> it in some fashion. Talk about making a career out of being a cheap slob.
>> I wonder why no one has interviewed her parents?
>>
>>
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/07/opinions/stormy-daniels-deserves-fair...
> 
> I'm not sure why she thinks she can sign an NDA, take $130 large, then talk
> anyway just because Trump didn't sign it.


You can't possibly be a lawyer, Jar Jar.  You are the most stupid person 
I've ever seen with respect to understanding legal matters.  Most of 
this stuff is common sense.  To wit, when you said "just because..." 
that's when you sounded like a fucking moron.  The preponderence of 
evidence is much more than that.  A) Trump didn't sign the NDA.  B) 
Trump didn't pay the money.  C) Was a pseudonym used for Trump to? 
Here's the lawsuit itself (it's a legal document so you might not 
understand it):

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ocvnkwprbs7enje/Filed%20Complaint.pdf?dl=0

"Donald Trump aka David Dennison"

#18 "By design of Mr. Cohen, the Hush Agreement used aliases to refer to 
Ms. Clifford and Mr. Trump."


Sounds like she was given a gift of 130 grand for an NDA between two 
fictitious people which was designed specifically not to be traced back 
to Trump.  Now that the cat's out of the bag the snowflakes are saying 
"No, it was about Mr. Trump, you can't reneg!"  How the fuck is that 
pile of bullshit going to hold up in court, counselor?