From Five Thirty Eight:
Politics Podcast: How Should The Media Cover Stormy Daniels’s Story?

It shouldn’t. “The story” is completely ridiculous and I can’t wait for it to stop littering my news feed.

6 thoughts on “Coverage

  1. I’m just confused that he is a fellow who went to great lengths to pay a porn star to go away and never talk and then sue a porn star to shut her up. Huh? Whose good opinion did he value enough to go to these absurd lengths? What finances did he preserve by offering this contract (that he didn’t sign?)


    1. I think this is just something that is done automatically at his level. Prostitutes are routinely asked to sign non-disclosure agreements. But it’s so unimportant that he even forgot to sign. I have no doubt that she’s one prostitute among two thousand completely interchangeable ones. I only hope we don’t have to hear from all of them. I also hope we don’t turn into Russia where scores of these vapid, ugly prostitutes are inhabiting every media outlet with their “stories.”


      1. Uh huh. It’s not like the
        D.C. Madam was swimming in a bunch of non-disclosure agreements.

        If it was a routine matter, it’s a spectacular botching with this running back and forth trying to get people to sign documents about something that happened years after the fact. You don’t turn it into some nonsensical bullshit where someone claims the contract is void because you screwed up on your end by not signing (you didn’t form a bilateral contract) or you coerced them (ha) or you didn’t perform your end (I shut up in exchange for this money; where’s the money?) But I guess that’s what happens when you have a habit of lying to your lawyers and not paying your legal bills. You retain incompetent flunkies.

        “Let’s make a bunch of shell corporations to shield the identities of the parties to this dubiously legal contract!”
        “Great I’ll sign.Where to do I fax it to?”
        “My fax machine in Trump Tower. My office is within shouting distance when my boss wants burnt hamburger for lunch!”


  2. I frankly am not entirely sure what the story is, let alone know how or if the media should be covering it. Sounds suspect though, but just how relevant is it to me personally I wonder?


  3. (Or, to cut a long story short, “Donald Trump is a nasty, egotistical, misogynistic [etc.] shyster who should not be anywhere near the White House” is hardly news by now, so why do we need reminding yet again?)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

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