Pretty sure a mainstream media outlet wouldn't pay 150K to spike a story of the "hundreds, possibly thousands of men doing the Exact Same Thing". Must be nice to have friends willing to spend that kinda bread on you.
Well, believe what you want. What version is she offering this week? At first, she WAS paid $130K to stay silent (which contract she violated by going public. I believe that's an actionable cause, as the lawyers put it).
Then she came out and said she WASN'T paid anything. The next thing was the affair never happened. Then after that, it did happen. After that, she wouldn't confirm one way or the other.
Which version do you want to believe? Because constantly changing your story is the prime indicator of a LIAR.
If you can't see that this is nothing more than a publicity stunt to try to jumpstart this aging bimbo's career, well, 'cain't help ya, then!'
So you didn't even read the article. First, I think you're getting Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal confused.
Stormy was paid 130K by Trump's Michael Cohen. He violated the NDA between Stormy and Trump by discussing the case openly. Stormy now believes she can talk about it openly. The story was already it in the open anyways since it was talked about in a 2011 magazine interview. This may or may not be a violation of campaign finance law.
Karen McDougal was paid 150K by National Enquirer boss David Pecker for the story about her affair with Trump. Pecker spiked the story since it was his intent to protect Trump from the beginning. McDougal has discussed things a little but part of the deal with Pecker was a column in the Enquirer which never materialized, so the contract might be void. This also means that Pecker has dirt on Trump which could make him vulnerable.
Both women are registered Republicans so they may not want to go scorched earth on Trump. In both cases, both women were paid for their silence but Trump's buddies may not have kept their ends up.
I'm not referring specifically to either woman. I am referring in my original post to the idiocy of the whole concept.
"Cheating husband outed 11 years after affair" is how the headlines should read and even then, if you keep the celebrity names out of it, you still have a non-starter.
But you believe what you read in The National Enquirer?
Sadly, there is no hope for you. (Too bad the Weekly World News is no longer being published)
There was nothing printed in the National Enquirer. And its not about what I believe or think.
On one hand, the Trump Campaign felt the need to protect themselves by paying hush money to a woman who might've had an affair with Trump. This is known.
Its somewhat less known that a friend of Trump's felt the need to protect him by purchasing and preventing dissemination of a story of an alleged affair with a different woman.
Big money was exchanged both times. Curious that happened twice. Doesn't seem that run of the mill to me. $280 000 is a lot of money.
What, exactly, is The New Yorker trying to say here? That Donald Trump, businessman and Reality TV star couldn't keep his penis in his pants?
ReplyDeleteLet me say this slowly, so everybody understands...
BIG.
FUCKING.
DEAL.
In being a straying husband and/or Hollywood type, he joins hundreds, possibly thousands of men doing the Exact Same Thing.
Take away the celebrity names and you have a story that even the Mudhouse Tribune wouldn't run.
< Y A W N >
Pretty sure a mainstream media outlet wouldn't pay 150K to spike a story of the "hundreds, possibly thousands of men doing the Exact Same Thing". Must be nice to have friends willing to spend that kinda bread on you.
ReplyDeleteWell, believe what you want. What version is she offering this week? At first, she WAS paid $130K to stay silent (which contract she violated by going public. I believe that's an actionable cause, as the lawyers put it).
ReplyDeleteThen she came out and said she WASN'T paid anything. The next thing was the affair never happened. Then after that, it did happen. After that, she wouldn't confirm one way or the other.
Which version do you want to believe? Because constantly changing your story is the prime indicator of a LIAR.
If you can't see that this is nothing more than a publicity stunt to try to jumpstart this aging bimbo's career, well, 'cain't help ya, then!'
So you didn't even read the article. First, I think you're getting Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal confused.
ReplyDeleteStormy was paid 130K by Trump's Michael Cohen. He violated the NDA between Stormy and Trump by discussing the case openly. Stormy now believes she can talk about it openly. The story was already it in the open anyways since it was talked about in a 2011 magazine interview. This may or may not be a violation of campaign finance law.
Karen McDougal was paid 150K by National Enquirer boss David Pecker for the story about her affair with Trump. Pecker spiked the story since it was his intent to protect Trump from the beginning. McDougal has discussed things a little but part of the deal with Pecker was a column in the Enquirer which never materialized, so the contract might be void. This also means that Pecker has dirt on Trump which could make him vulnerable.
Both women are registered Republicans so they may not want to go scorched earth on Trump. In both cases, both women were paid for their silence but Trump's buddies may not have kept their ends up.
I'm not referring specifically to either woman. I am referring in my original post to the idiocy of the whole concept.
ReplyDelete"Cheating husband outed 11 years after affair" is how the headlines should read and even then, if you keep the celebrity names out of it, you still have a non-starter.
But you believe what you read in The National Enquirer?
Sadly, there is no hope for you. (Too bad the Weekly World News is no longer being published)
There was nothing printed in the National Enquirer. And its not about what I believe or think.
ReplyDeleteOn one hand, the Trump Campaign felt the need to protect themselves by paying hush money to a woman who might've had an affair with Trump. This is known.
Its somewhat less known that a friend of Trump's felt the need to protect him by purchasing and preventing dissemination of a story of an alleged affair with a different woman.
Big money was exchanged both times. Curious that happened twice. Doesn't seem that run of the mill to me. $280 000 is a lot of money.