Dissecting Trump's and Stormy's Hush Agreement

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: DogStarIn1066

Doesn’t make me go “hummmm.”

I don’t even know if I believe that Trump was ever worried about the Stormy Daniels story being made public. It’s going to provide a fabulous distraction for Democrats to feed on but doesn’t hurt his reputation at all.

Times like this make me convinced he was groomed by Bill Clinton.

Why did he agree to pay her hush money then?

Maybe he set up a convenient scandal to keep his detractors occupied and distracted?

Maybe he arranged all of this with Stormy to funnel money his way from eager donors to Stormy’s legal fund.

I believe Stormy and her lawyer knew/know the agreement is legally binding. I believe Thy realized the *legal mistakes* in the Side Letter and the terms, etc. agreed to.

OR maybe he slept with her and her lawyer is just completely incompetent. She can sue her lawyer for allowing those *legal mistakes* to go unnoticed if she has to pay out to Trump.

Time will tell.

Or maybe the simple explanation is the best. He had her paid off before the election to keep her silent.

Maybe.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: DogStarIn1066

quick question that's been bugging me, (sorry if its seemed a derail) but did you mean to quote yourself in this thread ?


Its been a very long weekend for me, and I very well could have missed the clues pointing elsewhere if so I apologize.

No - using a phone and bunged up a response.

originally posted by: bulwarkz
Maybe that was payday for work done this year. Isn't that how Dennis Hastert got taken down? Paying out hush money? Stormy might be a private contractor
a reply to: DogStarIn1066

It is possible.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: MotherMayEye


Delivered is likely implied.

I know in a legal class I took it recently covered contract law..

Contract law is actually set up around the snail mail system. A contract is valid the second you send it. Not when it is received... if you sign a contract and send it in. The other party doesn’t even technically have to receive it.


However, a whole lot is based around the signature.

With this you had trumps lawyer sign for trump, without trumps knowledge..


So I don’t see how that could ever be binding.

See the lawyer made an agreement with trumps lawyer, on behalf of trump. THEN IS CLAIMING TRUMP DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT IT, but he still forged his signature..



So he forged trump signature without trumps knowledge..

That can’t be binding.

You need to read the OP more carefully. I don’t think you understood it. There are specific terms and clauses...nothing is implied.

And the Trump forged signature stuff comes from where??? Links? There is no Trump signature on the NDA Stormy has made public. No clue where you are getting that.

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: DogStarIn1066

Doesn’t make me go “hummmm.”

I don’t even know if I believe that Trump was ever worried about the Stormy Daniels story being made public. It’s going to provide a fabulous distraction for Democrats to feed on but doesn’t hurt his reputation at all.

Times like this make me convinced he was groomed by Bill Clinton.

Why did he agree to pay her hush money then?

Maybe he set up a convenient scandal to keep his detractors occupied and distracted?

Maybe he arranged all of this with Stormy to funnel money his way from eager donors to Stormy’s legal fund.

I believe Stormy and her lawyer knew/know the agreement is legally binding. I believe Thy realized the *legal mistakes* in the Side Letter and the terms, etc. agreed to.

OR maybe he slept with her and her lawyer is just completely incompetent. She can sue her lawyer for allowing those *legal mistakes* to go unnoticed if she has to pay out to Trump.

Time will tell.

Or maybe the simple explanation is the best. He had her paid off before the election to keep her silent.

Maybe.

Obviously that’s a possibility.

And?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: MotherMayEye


Delivered is likely implied.

I know in a legal class I took it recently covered contract law..

Contract law is actually set up around the snail mail system. A contract is valid the second you send it. Not when it is received... if you sign a contract and send it in. The other party doesn’t even technically have to receive it.


However, a whole lot is based around the signature.

With this you had trumps lawyer sign for trump, without trumps knowledge..


So I don’t see how that could ever be binding.

See the lawyer made an agreement with trumps lawyer, on behalf of trump. THEN IS CLAIMING TRUMP DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT IT, but he still forged his signature..



So he forged trump signature without trumps knowledge..

That can’t be binding.

You need to read the OP more carefully. I don’t think you understood it. There are specific term and clauses...nothing is implied.

And the Trump forged signature stuff comes from where??? Links? There is no Trump signature on the NDA Stormy has made public. No clue where you are getting that.

A contract has an offer, acceptance, mutuality, and exchange. It must also be legal - not break laws.

If Trump did not sign there is no mutuality, or acceptance. Not a legal contract. Sorry.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: GuidedKill
I stopped where you said you weren’t a lawyer.

You should have kept on because it's a contract written for NON-LAWYERS to understand and sign.

I think I can understand it just as well as Stormy Daniels and even Donald Trump.

But in position where your supposed understanding doesn’t carry any weight. My dog understands me spelling out treat but I don’t let him do my kids spelling homework.

Your legal opinion is a valuable as the paper stormys layer files his motions with. I’m sure you get the joke with your superior understanding and all.

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: MotherMayEye


Delivered is likely implied.

I know in a legal class I took it recently covered contract law..

Contract law is actually set up around the snail mail system. A contract is valid the second you send it. Not when it is received... if you sign a contract and send it in. The other party doesn’t even technically have to receive it.


However, a whole lot is based around the signature.

With this you had trumps lawyer sign for trump, without trumps knowledge..


So I don’t see how that could ever be binding.

See the lawyer made an agreement with trumps lawyer, on behalf of trump. THEN IS CLAIMING TRUMP DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT IT, but he still forged his signature..



So he forged trump signature without trumps knowledge..

That can’t be binding.

You need to read the OP more carefully. I don’t think you understood it. There are specific term and clauses...nothing is implied.

And the Trump forged signature stuff comes from where??? Links? There is no Trump signature on the NDA Stormy has made public. No clue where you are getting that.

A contract has an offer, acceptance, mutuality, and exchange. It must also be legal - not break laws.

If Trump did not sign there is no mutuality, or acceptance. Not a legal contract. Sorry.

Oh, he may or may not have signed it. But PER THE COUNTERPART TERMS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT, Stormy was not entitled to be delivered a copy signed by Trump.

Therefore, she has no just cause to assume he didn’t sign it and violate the agreement.

Just read the agreement rather than assume you know what was agreed to.

Geez.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: MotherMayEye

The fact she filed her suit in California is telling. It also explains why Trump's lawyers have filed a motion to move the suit to federal court.

The final nail in the coffin for this "scandal" is the fact Maxine Waters is now saying Stormy Daniels will bring Trump down.

The only kangaroo court that Suit stood a chance in. Even Dr. Zeus cat in the hat would dismiss this ridiculous suit.

I don’t know what’s more crazy, this nothing thread of the fact the Alt Left are now trying to hang their impeachment hat on stormy Daniels.

Who could have ever guessed 2018 would be so entertaining so early in.

a reply to: GuidedKill

Ok, then move on. This thread is not for you. I like to read legal documents and usually feel pretty confident about doing so.

Bye!

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: MotherMayEye


Delivered is likely implied.

I know in a legal class I took it recently covered contract law..

Contract law is actually set up around the snail mail system. A contract is valid the second you send it. Not when it is received... if you sign a contract and send it in. The other party doesn’t even technically have to receive it.


However, a whole lot is based around the signature.

With this you had trumps lawyer sign for trump, without trumps knowledge..


So I don’t see how that could ever be binding.

See the lawyer made an agreement with trumps lawyer, on behalf of trump. THEN IS CLAIMING TRUMP DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT IT, but he still forged his signature..



So he forged trump signature without trumps knowledge..

That can’t be binding.

You need to read the OP more carefully. I don’t think you understood it. There are specific term and clauses...nothing is implied.

And the Trump forged signature stuff comes from where??? Links? There is no Trump signature on the NDA Stormy has made public. No clue where you are getting that.

A contract has an offer, acceptance, mutuality, and exchange. It must also be legal - not break laws.

If Trump did not sign there is no mutuality, or acceptance. Not a legal contract. Sorry.

Oh, he may or may not have signed it. But PER THE COUNTERPART TERMS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT, Stormy was not entitled to be delivered a copy signed by Trump.

Therefore, she has no just cause to assume he didn’t sign it and violate the agreement.

Just read the agreement rather than assume you know what was agreed to.

Geez.

Once again the guy who stayed at a holiday inn is trying to tell everyone the legal motive or interpret a legal contract.

Remember everyone this person isn’t a lawyer. Matter of fact is most likely the farthest thing from it.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: MotherMayEye


Delivered is likely implied.

I know in a legal class I took it recently covered contract law..

Contract law is actually set up around the snail mail system. A contract is valid the second you send it. Not when it is received... if you sign a contract and send it in. The other party doesn’t even technically have to receive it.


However, a whole lot is based around the signature.

With this you had trumps lawyer sign for trump, without trumps knowledge..


So I don’t see how that could ever be binding.

See the lawyer made an agreement with trumps lawyer, on behalf of trump. THEN IS CLAIMING TRUMP DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT IT, but he still forged his signature..



So he forged trump signature without trumps knowledge..

That can’t be binding.

You need to read the OP more carefully. I don’t think you understood it. There are specific term and clauses...nothing is implied.

And the Trump forged signature stuff comes from where??? Links? There is no Trump signature on the NDA Stormy has made public. No clue where you are getting that.

A contract has an offer, acceptance, mutuality, and exchange. It must also be legal - not break laws.

If Trump did not sign there is no mutuality, or acceptance. Not a legal contract. Sorry.

Oh, he may or may not have signed it. But PER THE COUNTERPART TERMS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT, Stormy was not entitled to be delivered a copy signed by Trump.

Therefore, she has no just cause to assume he didn’t sign it and violate the agreement.

Just read the agreement rather than assume you know what was agreed to.

Geez.

It is not valid then. I write contracts for a living. I have written over 2 billion in contracts for the federal government in the last 15 years. Not one has been protested. Not one has even been challenged. I don't know what your background is, but there are always terms of art in a contract that have legal meanings that are not apparent to a lay person. That is why you have lawyers involved.

Sorry, but it sounds like this contract did not meet minimum standards, and if contested, and with the right law team, it very well could be determined to be invalid.

a reply to: GuidedKill

Present your legal arguments that dispute mine.

I am allowed to discuss my take and you are free to dispute the legal merit of my take.

If your only argument is that I am not a lawyer, then that doesn’t dispute a single thing I’ve written.

Go after the ball, not the player.

a reply to: DogStarIn1066

LOL.

OK.

The Agreement speaks for itself.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: GuidedKill

Present your legal arguments that dispute mine.

I am allowed to discuss my take and you are free to dispute the legal merit of my take.

If your only argument is that I am not a lawyer, then that doesn’t dispute a single thing I’ve written.

Go after the ball, not the player.

Ahem, I did, and you never addressed mutuality or acceptance. If Trump never signed then how do we know he agreed and understood, much less accepted.

MME...kudos on another dedicated researched thread. It does seem obvious that all is not as it seems...(ahem...Trump and MSM). I find it amazing that posters attacking....are attacking you and NOT the actual data/info that you so expertly displayed in your OP.

I know you are not a Trump supporter, so obviously, I know you have once again provided simply the FACTS and it is up to others to put aside partisanship and debate those, not you.

originally posted by: GuidedKill
I stopped where you said you weren’t a lawyer.

Why? Even a lawyer is intelligent enough to read on. It allows them to legally dispute someone with facts and not sarcastic snobbery.

You should retread the OPs post and then share your 'expertise' in explaining where she has misunderstood the legal verbiage of the contract.

We all want to deny ignorance here on ATS...please help us! Even the OP had made this request in her own words.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I also do not agree with this being baked in, just because of the hush money and now allegations trumps people threatened her.


Trump banging porn stars , I agree is baked in..


Trump paying them off AND/OR threatening them with bodily harm if they don’t sign...


That’s not baked in... imho

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: GuidedKill

Present your legal arguments that dispute mine.

I am allowed to discuss my take and you are free to dispute the legal merit of my take.

If your only argument is that I am not a lawyer, then that doesn’t dispute a single thing I’ve written.

Go after the ball, not the player.

Ahem, I did, and you never addressed mutuality or acceptance. If Trump never signed then how do we know he agreed and understood, much less accepted.

We don’t have any good cause to believe he didn’t sign it and neither does Stormy.

The agreement specifically allows for him to sign it and NOT deliver a copy to Stormy or her attorney.

He can even sign it tomorrow and the terms say it’s retroactive to October 28, 2016.

Those are the expressed terms that Stormy agreed to.

She signed that she was of sound mind, not coerced, etc...

It’s a private agreement regarding mutually agreed confidential information...surely Stormy knew and understood she would not be getting a Trump-signed copy of it considering she agreed to turn over such damning material — videos, photos, information — regarding DD and the agreement.

AND, AGAIN, THE AGREEMENT DIDN’T REQUIRE HIM TO GIVE HER A SIGNED COPY. She signed that agreement.

These are the expressed terms.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

The lawyer admitted he signed the document for trump, but without his knowledge..

I bet it is perfectly legal for the lawyer to sign for trump ASSUMING TRUMP KNOWS ABOUT IT.

But their story is the opposite.