Copyright: Public Domain / Used With Permission

There’s something that mystifies about this Stormy Daniels case over in the US. We all knew – or we weren’t paying attention – that Donald Trump shagged around. He’s been, by all accounts, unfaithful to each of his wives with the next one at the very least – Melania not having been replaced as yet being the difference there. We also know there have been any number of others along the way.

We’re also aware that he’s rich and rich men do have a habit of making little problems go away with a decent enough dose of cash.

So, what actually is the problem here? A shag that would be embarrassing if it came out in the middle of an election campaign is provided with some cash so that she doesn’t. And?

US President Donald Trump has said reimbursement to his personal lawyer for hush money paid to porn actress Stormy Daniels was done through a monthly retainer and “had nothing to do with the campaign”.

Not just nothing to do with the campaign, but wasn’t campaign money – despite it obviously enough being beneficial to the campaign that it were paid:

In a series of tweets, Mr. Trump said he had reimbursed his lawyer Michael Cohen the $130,000 that Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Clifford in 2016 as part of a contract for her silence over an alleged one-night stand with Mr. Trump in 2006. “Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll (sic) in this transaction,” Mr. Trump wrote.

The thing is, why is this all an issue?

Mr Trump’s argument appears to be that the NDA was a typical action taken out by celebrities and therefore not an election-related matter.

The bit that really confuses is why is it the liberals – liberals in that American meaning – who are going after this with such glee? Liberals – in that American meaning – clearly meaning, as it actually does, 90% of the American press. For a basic part of that concept of liberalism, about the only concept it shares with classical liberalism, is that what consenting adults get up to in the sack is up to those consenting adults. Bloke shags a bird, or doesn’t as the case may be, that’s up to the bloke and the bird and no one else. There’s not even the quibble about marriage vows and all that as no one on the liberal side seriously believes in those any more either.

So why is there such glee in chasing this? Hmm, what’s that?

It’s about the morals of a man who is President? Sorry, no, it’s about how Trump shouldn’t be President and any reason will do? Ah, yes, you mean they’re being hypocrites, don’t you.

Well, yes, there is that I suppose.

Subscribe to The CT Mailer!

7
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
3 Comment threads
4 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
SpikeManOfBathsynpPat Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Pat
Member
Pat

Does she have to pay the money back now that she’s broken her agreement? I’m sure there are plenty of Dem donors would be happy to help her pay Trump.

Spike
Member

That non-disclosure agreement sure produced a remarkably low amount of non-disclosure!

synp
Member
synp

Yeah. Not a great demonstration of the “art of the deal”

Spike
Member

$130,000 was the price for refraining from embarrassing an American tycoon. It is not the price for refraining from embarrassing the President. And Stormy Daniels was, and is, a whore.

Spike
Member

“What is actually the problem here” is that the Mueller investigation, after 14 months, is no longer about “Russian collusion.” It never was. It is about ensuring that there is unflattering Trump news in the press and on the networks every single day, pumping up Impeachment-or-Bust reps like Maxine Waters, making wobbly Republicans hesitant to align with Trump, and finding or manufacturing data to support the above, with a huge team of lawyers wordsmithing to show a nexus to their original mandate. And the reason Democrats are for it (and warning that shutting it down would produce a “Constitutional crisis”)… Read more »

ManOfBath
Member
ManOfBath

Can the Democrats stop all the pretence and be honest by admitting they simply don’t like Trump and want him thrown out of office even though he won the election? It would be far more honest.

Spike
Member

“Can the Democrats…be honest…?”

Puh-leeze!