Stephanie Clifford, also known as Adult star Stormy Daniels, has stated numerous times that nothing happened between her and Trump (well before he was President) — it’s on the record, it’s a fact.
Now, it seems she’s had a “change of heart” and plans to sue Trump so she can just “tell-all” about what probably-didn’t-happen between them (but even if it did it was before he was POTUS).
Super weak attempt. I speculate: She either wants more money or now that the spotlight is off her (aka losing money) this is her way of refocusing attention on herself. That’s all this crap is about in my opinion. Anyway…
Filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court, Stormy states that the nondisclosure agreement (NDA) is not enforceable because, she alleges, Donald Trump never signed it. Apparently Stormy, her lawyer, and Trump’s personal lawyer are the only signatories on the NDA.
“As is customary, it was widely understood at all times that unless all of the parties signed the document as required, the Hush Agreement, together with all its terms and conditions, was null and void,” the complaint claims.
It also alleges that the reason POTUS never signed it was for plausible deniability… further claiming that, in essence, he has the ability to shot down any knowledge of the agreement should it ever become public.
“To be clear, the attempts to intimidate Ms. Clifford into silence and ‘shut her up’ in order to ‘protect Mr. Trump’ continue unabated,” the complaint reads.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Stormy Daniels was paid 130,000 through a shell company called Essential Consultants LLC which took place on Oct. 28, 2016, though the “affair” began in 2006 and continued into 2007 according to the report.
Daniels and her lawyers claim that she is not, in fact, subject to any confidentiality agreement under the NDA due to it being invalid as mentioned above.
As reported by The Hill:
A White House official declined to comment to the Journal about the payment, but said that the allegations of the interaction between Trump and Clifford were “old, recycled reports, which were published and strongly denied prior to the election.”
Cohen told the Journal in a statement that Trump “once again vehemently denies” the encounter, but did not comment on the alleged $130,00 payment.
“This is now the second time that you are raising outlandish allegations against my client,” Cohen said in the statement. “You have attempted to perpetuate this false narrative for over a year; a narrative that has been consistently denied by all parties since at least 2011.”