Stormy Daniels on 60 Minutes

[HiGirlsRHot]

I'm curious what people thought of the Stormy Daniels interview on 60 Minutes (It's about 30 minutes)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/stormy...ffair-with-donald-trump-60-minutes-interview/

I find her very credible and sympathetic except for I don't believe she isn't doing for the money/fame.

I thought Anderson Cooper treated her like he would any other newsmaker which I found a step in the right direction as far as sex workers go. This article goes into more details on the subject.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...w-with-stormy-daniels/?utm_term=.dd6fa0d05c56

 

[JickyJuly]

I don't think she's necessarily doing it for the money. She just doesn't have anything to lose. If Trump was going to have an affair with someone and then threaten them, he'd need to have chosen someone who was not already all the way out there. To threaten someone with shame, you'd need to have had an affair with someone who finds public judgement threatening. She probably got recognized and name called everywhere she went even before this Trump business came out. Unfortunately, I think everything she says will be in vain. Trump supporters already showed us how much they care about his sexual violence against women when they voted for him. Even people who don't support Trump are showing their misogyny in regards to this one. Just another bummer on the crazy Trump train. I respect her for trying to call him on his shit though. I think it's rude how news outlets are coming for Milania. First lady or not, her marriage is hers. People seem a little too happy that she was treated poorly.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

I do believe her that she had million dollar offers, from other folks, and she doesn't have anything to lose at this point.

I'm not as pessimistic though. Obviously, anyone betting that XYZ scandal would hurt Teflon Trump would cause you to go broke. Same thing expecting most Republican to grow a spine. That said as the ex-Bush official made clear this is very likely a campaign finance law violation, and Sen. Edwards got prosecuted for a lesser offense. The Federal Election commission has no folks appointed by Trump (no shock) so it is possible that 2 Bush appointees, plus the Obama appointees could do something.

I have mixed feeling about Melania, you got to believe she knew that Trump fucked around before she married the guy. On the other hand, she didn't sign up to be FLOTUS.

 

[yummybrownfox]

This morning, some guys on a radio station were singing a song (jokingly) about Trump and Stormy Daniels, and they kept referring to her as "Stormy Danielle." It was driving me crazy. Lol.

 

[Lightfishcanada]

One issue I've have with this whole ordeal is how viciously people are attacking her career as an ad hominem attack on her character. Whether you're for or against Trump, I think that if you're on these forums, you can at least agree that delegitimizing the sex industry for this is a shitty thing to do.

 

[Shia]

Honestly, I was bored. I follow her on Twitter and absolutely love the clawbacks she makes to those trying to insult her. I guess I was hoping for a big juicy story which is why I was unfazed lol.

 

[Miss_Lollipop]

I'm just really fucking happy to hear that she spanked donald trump.

2018 made.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

I really haven't been following this too much for a few different reasons.

1) I don't have the time to really follow it
2) It doesn't directly affect my life

Beyond that, my general views are thus:

Who cares if he had an affair with someone? I don't, as it happens with millions of people a day around the world. Including world leaders, celebrities, entertainers, etc.. Do we know what their relationship agreements are? Not really. Perhaps it's an open relationship? Should it really matter to us? I think not.

As to Trump and Stormy Daniels, I really don't care if he had an affair with her. Nor do I really care if there was a private agreement between Trump(or a representative of his) and her about "hush money". If she accepted it, she should hold to her word and not be discussing this.

Like when Clinton was in office and all the stuff came up about his affair with Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, etc. Yes, he's had countless affairs. Do I care? Not really. What I did care about was how it was said he misused his power when he was Governer of Arkansas, and during his Presidency. As well as lying under oath.

If all it is is just a sexual affair, then who cares? It's an issue between the people who did it, and their spouses or SO. If it's beyond that in terms of assault &/or battery, then let the law investigate and let the courts decide. Far too many people get involved with things they shouldn't, especially at a level such as Trump, because they either support someone and want to defend them. Or, they dislike them and want to see them fry. If people are just as concerned about their own lives, as they are about celebrity gossip and happenings, the world just might come out a better place.

 

[CoffeeKnight]

I'm just really fucking happy to hear that she spanked donald trump.

2018 made.

I don't know, I could have gone my entire life without that mental image. Or any mental image involving Trump and sex. I hope there aren't any pictures or video because there isn't enough brain bleach in the world to unsee that for me. I don't know how she, Melania, or anyone else could sleep with that disgusting human being.

 

[JickyJuly]

If all it is is just a sexual affair, then who cares?

Paying to sleep with porn stars is still prostitution, and his platform has, thus far, very much included vilifying sex work legal and otherwise. Is hush money really an agreement to be upheld if you're paying someone not to talk about a crime? I agree that the cheating part isn't our business, but given that many politicians (especially those on the Republican side) try to legislate feigned morality, it's hard for the current administration to argue that angle with any clout. The evangelicals have backed themselves into a corner a bit on this one. All they can do now is blame the harlot. Sad that our country is still willing to climb aboard for that. If she was threatened once he was in office (I believe she was. She has no reason to lie, and threatening the wrong woman seems like a reason that would set this who thing into motion. My temper is one that lets me burn my own self down to come for someone who threatens me...) everyone should care about that. The government being used to threaten a private citizen on behalf of the President over his personal life and sexual habits should matter to everyone. If she weren't a porn star, it would. That's the real story. Instead, everyone just wants to hear salacious details and judge his wife and his mistress. If that's who we are as a country, shame on us and we deserve the tacky President we have.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Paying to sleep with porn stars is still prostitution, and his platform has, thus far, very much included vilifying sex work legal and otherwise. Is hush money really an agreement to be upheld if you're paying someone not to talk about a crime? I agree that the cheating part isn't our business, but given that many politicians (especially those on the Republican side) try to legislate feigned morality, it's hard for the current administration to argue that angle with any clout. The evangelicals have backed themselves into a corner a bit on this one. All they can do now is blame the harlot. Sad that our country is still willing to climb aboard for that. If she was threatened once he was in office (I believe she was. She has no reason to lie, and threatening the wrong woman seems like a reason that would set this who thing into motion. My temper is one that lets me burn my own self down to come for someone who threatens me...) everyone should care about that. The government being used to threaten a private citizen on behalf of the President over his personal life and sexual habits should matter to everyone. If she weren't a porn star, it would. That's the real story. Instead, everyone just wants to hear salacious details and judge his wife and his mistress. If that's who we are as a country, shame on us and we deserve the tacky President we have.

What's your thoughts then on what Clinton did? His administration more or less did the same thing. Both as a Governer and as President.

 

[JickyJuly]

What's your thoughts then on what Clinton did? His administration more or less did the same thing. Both as a Governer and as President.

He should have been removed from office both for taking advantage of an intern (even though she was of age, she was a subordinate and their affair happened in the white house ffs) and for lying about it. The fact that he was allowed to remain is a blemish on American politics and a burden placed on American women. With his nonsense too, both his wife and his victim were subjected to more scrutiny than he was. Sad to see that we've not made any better steps in 20 years.

 

[heybarkeep]

More relevant a comment for the Trump Jr affair drama but why are some people so open and seemingly proud to be having affairs? Not questioning why some do it, especially not with these types of people involved, but why knowingly do it and then try to act like you aren't a bit scummy too for participating. Always found it strange how some almost celebrate it.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

He should have been removed from office both for taking advantage of an intern (even though she was of age, she was a subordinate and their affair happened in the white house ffs) and for lying about it. The fact that he was allowed to remain is a blemish on American politics and a burden placed on American women. With his nonsense too, both his wife and his victim were subjected to more scrutiny than he was. Sad to see that we've not made any better steps in 20 years.

In general, I agree with you on this. The difference for me is that I see Trump's as having been done before he was in office, and I think that Stormy and others are coming forward with a political agenda. Or, I think that she feels she was slighted by the amount she agreed to and accepted.

To set the record straight, this isn't shaming her of being involved in the relationship/affair. I just don't like the fact that she accepted an agreed upon amount of money, to remain quiet (whether over an illegal act or not) and has now come out. It's going back on you word, and breaking an agreement. To the best of my knowledge, no one was injured, raped, killed, etc. so to me this is a personal/political agenda and should have stayed quiet.

But, now we're at a point of potential abuse of power. While he's ultimately responsible for their actions, is he directing it or are they doing it on their own as part of "policy"? There's far too many unknowns, and no matter what, we can't seem to get a clear and unbiased report on this.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

More relevant a comment for the Trump Jr affair drama but why are some people so open and seemingly proud to be having affairs? Not questioning why some do it, especially not with these types of people involved, but why knowingly do it and then try to act like you aren't a bit scummy too for participating. Always found it strange how some almost celebrate it.

But, is it scummy if it's open relationship(s) that they are all in and willingly take part of? While not celebrating it, per se, there's a number of people here who have commented on being in open relationships. Are you saying they are being scummy too?

 

[heybarkeep]

But, is it scummy if it's open relationship(s) that they are all in and willingly take part of? While not celebrating it, per se, there's a number of people here who have commented on being in open relationships. Are you saying they are being scummy too?

Really didn't think it necessary to say that open relationships weren't what I was talking about but no, wouldn't be scummy.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Really didn't think it necessary to say that open relationships weren't what I was talking about but no, wouldn't be scummy.

True. But, some people view open relationships in a derogatory manner.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

F

To set the record straight, this isn't shaming her of being involved in the relationship/affair. I just don't like the fact that she accepted an agreed upon amount of money, to remain quiet (whether over an illegal act or not) and has now come out. It's going back on you word, and breaking an agreement. To the best of my knowledge, no one was injured, raped, killed, etc. so to me this is a personal/political agenda and should have stayed quiet.

You've forgotten about the part where Trump has denied (aka lied) about the existence of the affair. This president lies so often we have forgotten that lying by our leaders should be a rare activity. Why should she have to remain silent about something that Trump says never happened.? Also the WSJ reported the affair before the election, so somebody started talking before her. If it was Trump or his legal team they broke the agreement first so that allows her to talk. There is also the open question is their actually a legal agreement, it is unsigned and Trump may or may not have known about it

Finally, and most importantly it is bad public policy to enforce NDA that cover-up illegal activity That's one of the things we learned from the #MeToo movement. Harvey Weinstein and others were using NDA not just to cover up consensual affairs but sexual assault and other sex crimes. In the Stormy Daniels case the $130K it is very likely an illegal campaign contribution, and as such the public has right to know about it.

 

[JickyJuly]

a personal/political agenda and should have stayed quiet.

Why though? If he's sticking his ween in any girl he can, he's opened himself up to whatever agenda they have. She's not his wife. He left his wife at home with a pregnant belly or a baby. If he wanted someone whose agenda included his happiness above $ or politics, he could have stayed home with his family. To me, the fact that she was threatened while he was in office matters no matter what her agenda or agreement was. Even if Stormy Daniels is 110% the sleazy, lying money grabber that so many people want to believe she is, does that make our President's decision better or worse? If she is a snake, we have someone in office who can't control himself in the presence of a snake. Does the office not deserve more seriousness and integrity than that? This is where the Clinton stuff comes back into play. When Americans allowed Bill Clinton to stay in, we made it clear to politicians that what they do matters less to us than what team they're on. We treat our politics like a battle between blue and red. If our guy is shit, who cares as long as the other guy loses! If we had ousted Clinton, someone with Trump's skeletons would NEVER have had the nerve to even run let alone threaten the skeletons to stay quiet. Dems and Reps should be screaming for Trump's removal now, and they should have done the same to Clinton.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

F


You've forgotten about the part where Trump has denied (aka lied) about the existence of the affair. This president lies so often we have forgotten that lying by our leaders should be a rare activity. Why should she have to remain silent about something that Trump says never happened.? Also the WSJ reported the affair before the election, so somebody started talking before her. If it was Trump or his legal team they broke the agreement first so that allows her to talk. There is also the open question is their actually a legal agreement, it is unsigned and Trump may or may not have known about it

Finally, and most importantly it is bad public policy to enforce NDA that cover-up illegal activity That's one of the things we learned from the #MeToo movement. Harvey Weinstein and others were using NDA not just to cover up consensual affairs but sexual assault and other sex crimes. In the Stormy Daniels case the $130K it is very likely an illegal campaign contribution, and as such the public has right to know about it.

If you read my previous post, I'm not condoning rape, assault, abuse, etc. Those SHOULD be reported as I said in my earlier post. However, we are talking about a sexual relationship between two consenting adults. Where there was an agreement between her and Trump, or someone on his staff (private or public) to keep things quiet. That is the focus of what I am discussing.

As to whether he is lying or not about this case, I know only small amounts of it since I rarely watch TV or read news on the internet. Affairs to me, whether he's lying about it or not, really are of no interest of mine. All politicans have lied, which is a very said state of affairs (no pun intended), and they lie often. Nothing new there.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Why though? If he's sticking his ween in any girl he can, he's opened himself up to whatever agenda they have. She's not his wife. He left his wife at home with a pregnant belly or a baby. If he wanted someone whose agenda included his happiness above $ or politics, he could have stayed home with his family. To me, the fact that she was threatened while he was in office matters no matter what her agenda or agreement was. Even if Stormy Daniels is 110% the sleazy, lying money grabber that so many people want to believe she is, does that make our President's decision better or worse? If she is a snake, we have someone in office who can't control himself in the presence of a snake. Does the office not deserve more seriousness and integrity than that? This is where the Clinton stuff comes back into play. When Americans allowed Bill Clinton to stay in, we made it clear to politicians that what they do matters less to us than what team they're on. We treat our politics like a battle between blue and red. If our guy is shit, who cares as long as the other guy loses! If we had ousted Clinton, someone with Trump's skeletons would NEVER have had the nerve to even run let alone threaten the skeletons to stay quiet. Dems and Reps should be screaming for Trump's removal now, and they should have done the same to Clinton.

Again, if his relationship with his wife is an open relationship, what does it matter? That's their business, not ours. WE shouldn't be judging them if they have an open relationship. Doing so would be no different than judging a cam model or other sex worker for the work they do.

As to if she's a snake, sometimes one doesn't know it until they lie down in bed with them. How many relationships have you had where the other person turns out to be who you didn't realize they truly are? At the same time, he's no upstanding person either, and it's been known who he is for a long time.

Again, I'm not disagreeing that if there's illegal actions, he shouldn't be prosecuted. Up to, and including, removal of office. Just as they should have done with Clinton.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

f you read my previous post, I'm not condoning rape, assault, abuse, etc. Those SHOULD be reported as I said in my earlier post. However, we are talking about a sexual relationship between two consenting adults. Where there was an agreement between her and Trump, or someone on his staff (private or public) to keep things quiet. That is the focus of what I am discussing.

As to whether he is lying or not about this case, I know only small amounts of it since I rarely watch TV or read news on the internet. Affairs to me, whether he's lying about it or not, really are of no interest of mine. All politicans have lied, which is a very said state of affairs (no pun intended), and they lie often. Nothing new there.

You are missing my point. The very act of paying her $130,000 days before the election is a felony violation of Federal campaign contribution laws, the limit is $4,500. It is also illegal not to report the contribution. Senator Edwards was prosecuted for exactly the same thing, but the payoff, by his fixer was a year before the campaign.

As in most scandals, the big crime is in the coverup.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

You are missing my point. The very act of paying her $130,000 days before the election is a felony violation of Federal campaign contribution laws, the limit is $4,500. It is also illegal not to report it the contribution. Senator Edwards was prosecuted for exactly the same thing, but the payoff, by his fixer was a year before the campaign.

As in most scandals, the big crime is in the coverup.

I'm not missing any point. Do we know for a fact that it was paid for by campain contributions? If it was, then yes, it should be subject to the laws. If it was paid for by private funds outside contributions, then I don't think it should. If Trump paid it, then he's lying about it actually occrring. There is a distinct difference between where the funds come from to pay the "hush money". Senator Edwards was indicted for using campaign contributions. At this point, there's far too many speculations.

 

[heybarkeep]

Why though? If he's sticking his ween in any girl he can, he's opened himself up to whatever agenda they have. She's not his wife. He left his wife at home with a pregnant belly or a baby. If he wanted someone whose agenda included his happiness above $ or politics, he could have stayed home with his family. To me, the fact that she was threatened while he was in office matters no matter what her agenda or agreement was. Even if Stormy Daniels is 110% the sleazy, lying money grabber that so many people want to believe she is, does that make our President's decision better or worse? If she is a snake, we have someone in office who can't control himself in the presence of a snake. Does the office not deserve more seriousness and integrity than that? This is where the Clinton stuff comes back into play. When Americans allowed Bill Clinton to stay in, we made it clear to politicians that what they do matters less to us than what team they're on. We treat our politics like a battle between blue and red. If our guy is shit, who cares as long as the other guy loses! If we had ousted Clinton, someone with Trump's skeletons would NEVER have had the nerve to even run let alone threaten the skeletons to stay quiet. Dems and Reps should be screaming for Trump's removal now, and they should have done the same to Clinton.

I think it was South Park that had a good joke about Clinton lowering the bar so much on what Americans will tolerate that it somehow led to stuff like Honey Boo Boo being seen as acceptable. Not defending Trump here, even I have limits, but a wealthy guy paying escorts for sex isn't really comparable to a man using his power to coerce or get what he wants from women. Not that Trump is above or innocent of similar behavior but he seems like less of a deviant in some areas I guess.

 

[JickyJuly]

Again, if his relationship with his wife is an open relationship, what does it matter? That's their business, not ours. WE shouldn't be judging them if they have an open relationship. Doing so would be no different than judging a cam model or other sex worker for the work they do.

Nothing I said suggests that I judge him for cheating on his wife or not depending on the parameters of their relationship. The problem isn't cheating or not. Cheating is the non-issue of the story unless you're an evangelical. Even then, he's already on wife 3 and doesn't have a historically clean slate. The evangelicals can't say he's let them down. The issue isn't morality. It's liability. His behavior is a liability. If his wife wants to carry on a marriage, I respect her. She has a right to take that on. All of America should not do the same. Let's look at this like a business dealing that includes some amount of personal interaction. He chose to sleep with someone for money. He chose to sleep with someone he's now painting as an opportunist taking advantage of him. He tried to silence her with money and failed. He tried to silence her with threats and failed. Plenty of this is illegal, and all of it is weakness. He followed his cock into a garbage situation then tried to use lies, money and violence to get out of it. This time it was his lawyer's money. Next time, it could easily be tax payers'. She's said the threats came after he was in office. The liability on that is huge. How do you not find that to be outside of what is acceptable for the highest public office? I mean, you're not alone. It seems like a lot of citizens are just accepting and laughing it off. I just don't understand how?

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Nothing I said suggests that I judge him for cheating on his wife or not depending on the parameters of their relationship. The problem isn't cheating or not. Cheating is the non-issue of the story unless you're an evangelical. Even then, he's already on wife 3 and doesn't have a historically clean slate. The evangelicals can't say he's let them down. The issue isn't morality. It's liability. His behavior is a liability. If his wife wants to carry on a marriage, I respect her. She has a right to take that on. All of America should not do the same. Let's look at this like a business dealing that includes some amount of personal interaction. He chose to sleep with someone for money. He chose to sleep with someone he's now painting as an opportunist taking advantage of him. He tried to silence her with money and failed. He tried to silence her with threats and failed. Plenty of this is illegal, and all of it is weakness. He followed his cock into a garbage situation then tried to use lies, money and violence to get out of it. This time it was his lawyer's money. Next time, it could easily be tax payers'. She's said the threats came after he was in office. The liability on that is huge. How do you not find that to be outside of what is acceptable for the highest public office? I mean, you're not alone. It seems like a lot of citizens are just accepting and laughing it off. I just don't understand how?

"Laughing it off"? FFS I said that he should be charged if he's abusing power. I don't get where you come off saying I'm laughing it off. Go back and re-read some of my posts and you'll see that we're more or less agreeing on many of the same points.

 

[Gen]

"Laughing it off"? FFS I said that he should be charged if he's abusing power. I don't get where you come off saying I'm laughing it off. Go back and re-read some of my posts and you'll see that we're more or less agreeing on many of the same points.

She said “a lot of citizens” were laughing it off, not you specifically.

 

[JickyJuly]

Right, I didn't mean you specifically. Most Americans are making it about the blonde and laughing it off. The part that was specific to you that I find confusing is looking at it from a cheating angle instead of an illegal activity/poor leadership ability angle since we seem to agree about the Clinton issue. I think most people here can see his cheating as personal to his marriage/not for us to speak on since we're a group that seems understanding of sexuality. So, surprising to see you go back to that point again I guess?

 

[Deleted member 37064]

She said “a lot of citizens” were laughing it off, not you specifically.

Oh, I dunno. Perhaps the bold sentences make one think she's saying it specifically to me.

Nothing I said suggests that I judge him for cheating on his wife or not depending on the parameters of their relationship. The problem isn't cheating or not. Cheating is the non-issue of the story unless you're an evangelical. Even then, he's already on wife 3 and doesn't have a historically clean slate. The evangelicals can't say he's let them down. The issue isn't morality. It's liability. His behavior is a liability. If his wife wants to carry on a marriage, I respect her. She has a right to take that on. All of America should not do the same. Let's look at this like a business dealing that includes some amount of personal interaction. He chose to sleep with someone for money. He chose to sleep with someone he's now painting as an opportunist taking advantage of him. He tried to silence her with money and failed. He tried to silence her with threats and failed. Plenty of this is illegal, and all of it is weakness. He followed his cock into a garbage situation then tried to use lies, money and violence to get out of it. This time it was his lawyer's money. Next time, it could easily be tax payers'. She's said the threats came after he was in office. The liability on that is huge. How do you not find that to be outside of what is acceptable for the highest public office? I mean, you're not alone. It seems like a lot of citizens are just accepting and laughing it off. I just don't understand how?

Yep, sure seems like it's directed at me with those sentences. Especially when it was my post she quoted...

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

I'm not missing any point. Do we know for a fact that it was paid for by campain contributions? If it was, then yes, it should be subject to the laws. If it was paid for by private funds outside contributions, then I don't think it should. If Trump paid it, then he's lying about it actually occrring. There is a distinct difference between where the funds come from to pay the "hush money". Senator Edwards was indicted for using campaign contributions. At this point, there's far too many speculations.

What you think matters less than what the laws says. CNN, WSJ, Washington Post, NY Times etc. have all had zillion legal experts weigh in, but I guess you don't read or watch them. If Cohn did what he said and paid Stormy $130K from his own money that would an illegal contribution by Cohn to the Trump campaign. If Cohn was reimbursed by the campaign, then not reporting the payment would be illegal. If Cohn was reimbursed by some other entity, say a Trump business this would raise different campaign laws. You are correct both the facts and the law are in dispute, which is why it is important to get information out.