BREAKING: Attorney Charles Harder is representing Donald Trump in the Stephanie Clifford, aka Stormy Daniels lawsuit, which EC, LLC, is attempting to remove to federal court. More to come ...pic.twitter.com/qn9AuNoDT8
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
BREAKING: Trump Joins Legal Fight In Stormy Daniels' Lawsuit To End Her "Hush Agreement"https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/trump-joins-legal-fight-in-stormy-daniels-lawsuit-to-end?utm_term=.nxAYOlEyZ …
Easy answer - Trump is absolutely desperate to prevent evidence which would allow his wife out of their prenup. She’s gone eight seconds after that happens.
Agreed. He could care less about repetitional harm. It’s all about the benjamins. That’s why he ran in the first place.
Pretty interesting. So Trump has standing even though they earlier argued he wasn’t a signed party to the original contract and therefore wasn’t involved? This seems compelling and to belie original position that he wasn’t involved. Am I mis-reading?
So he wants to settle.
As if he has any reputation to protect at this point. This is nothing more than legal intimidation to silence. Why has he not tweeted a single word against her? That alone should tell you all you need to know.
Who cares! It was consensual and before he became president. Remember the Kennedy brothers?
I don't care about the relationship, not one iota. I care about the denials, lies, the possible legal implications, threats etc. I could care less that he is a despicable human being.
Haha, the lawyers name is Harder.
Chris help me here. Her suit seeks a ruling on the validity of the agreement. A judge isn't going to compel arbitration without hearing issues related to the enforceability of the agreement are they? Or am I missing something?
Chris, you really don't get this. That highlighted section states that they plan to join in the motion that would essentially dismiss the case, not that Trump would be a party to the arbitration.
If Trump compels arbitration he wouldn't be a party to that arbitration?
Defendants join in motion made by co-defendants all the time if that motion would essentially dismiss the case. That sentence has nothing to do with who would be in the arbitration.
Sure, but I'm wondering if that's also true about a petition to compel arbitration? I don't know.
"in this action" lol
Given all the surgery Stormy has had I am not sure she even needs to refer to herself as Stephanie Clifford. Stephanie has been superseded by Stormy.
You're so classy, Walter.
Didn't Trump not sign the Arbitration Agreement? Is it valid if not signed by all parties?
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.