I saw the story first
in The Daily Mail:
Stormy Daniels has been arrested in Ohio for allegedly grabbing an undercover officer's backside while performing in a strip club....
Then I saw it
in the NYT:
Stephanie Clifford, the pornographic film actress who said she had an affair with Donald J. Trump before he became president, was arrested at a strip club in Columbus, Ohio, her lawyer said early Thursday.
Ms. Clifford, who performs under the name Stormy Daniels, had been scheduled to appear at Sirens Gentlemen’s Club in northeastern Columbus....
She was arrested “for allegedly allowing a customer to touch her while on stage in a non sexual manner,” her lawyer, Michael Avenatti, said on Twitter....
The Daily Mail does at some point in the article get to the lawyer's presentation of what happened:
On Twitter, Avenatti said: 'My client Stormy Daniels was arrested in Columbus, Ohio, while performing same act she has performed across the nation at nearly a hundred clubs. This was a setup and politically motivated. It reeks of desperation. We will fight all bogus charges.'
And, for its part, the NYT does eventually get around to this:
Police officers at the club said that while dancing topless, Ms. Clifford pressed patrons’ faces into her chest and fondled the breasts of some women in the audience, according to an affidavit filed by the police. She performed similar acts on three officers, and grabbed one by the buttocks, the affidavit said.
It's a story with 2 sides (at least). There's an Ohio law governing the operation of a "sexually oriented business." I think what Avenatti is referring to when he speaks of touching "in a non sexual manner," is that
the text of the statute bars all touching, which just deprives you of any room to defend yourself by saying it wasn't sexual:
No employee who regularly appears nude or seminude on the premises of a sexually oriented business, while on the premises of that sexually oriented business and while nude or seminude, shall knowingly touch a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or the clothing of a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or allow a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family to touch the employee or the clothing of the employee.
What?? I've already spent too much time trying to figure out if that's a misprint and I am on the verge of losing my mind. My guess is that some Ohio legislators were a
little freaked out by the idea of anybody touching anybody and then went hyper over the idea that the state was making it a crime to hug your own father or husband.
पोस्ट्स
१५२ टिप्पण्या:
LOL
The loyal Hillary supporting (corruption excusing)left will use this woman and the Russia collusion lie to bring down Trump.
Strip clubs are one of two precarious situations as to the definition of reality.
In this case what is presented as sexual is in fact non-sexual, with bouncers to enforce it if it comes to that.
Stormy though wants it to be sexual, for political reasons.
so, incest shows are legal in ohio?
Right. Because touching breasts and buttocks isn't sexual. Also, a blow job in the oval office isn't sex. A cigar in the hoohoo - not sex. Driving a woman into a ditch under a bridge while intoxicated and leaving her there while she dies gets you a lifetime Senate seat in Massachusetts.
The real crime here is that Trump won and Hillary lost.
Run this law up the new bikini-clad SCOTUS poll and see if anyone salutes.
so, incest shows are legal in ohio?
That's how I read it, too.
I think it’s more that they didn’t want women being charged with crimes if their father or husband found out what they were doing and came to pull them out.
It would not surprise me if her lawyer put the police up to this.
Three undercover officers? In the 90's, there were so many undercover agents in the white supremacy/militia business that they were informing on each other.
I heard they have never charged anyone based on this 2007 law until now.
Columbus must have zero crime if this is what they are paying multiple undercover cops to do.
Republicans, always playing lawfare against their enemies.
No expert here, but how do they do lap dances in Ohio, if the strippers can't even touch the clothes of the patrons?
Stormy's lawyer asserted that his client was booked on Trumped-up charges.
And this happened at a strip club? Who'd a thunk it............
For the dancer — the person arrested — it's not sexual.
The statute is written in a way that allows prosecutors to prove what they can prove and not get stymied by the dancer's utterly credible contention that her state of mind was devoid of sexual intent, feeling, gratification... anything but a desire for money or perhaps an interest in keeping physically active or being admired for her talent and beauty.
Sisters, sisters They even have the ostrich feather fans that burlesque woman, whose name escapes me, used.
"I think it’s more that they didn’t want women being charged with crimes if their father or husband found out what they were doing and came to pull them out."
Then she would not be "allowing" him to touch her. He'd be touching her against her will.
Look to another section of the statute to see if the family member would be committing a crime for touching the dancer (if there were no exclusion for family members).
But a touching without consent would be criminalized elsewhere in the statutes.
It might be sexual for the person who is groped.
#Meetoo
Getting the dollar in the G string becomes a delicate operation.
This law gives the cops an easy chance to look the other way for a small fee or other perk.
From a prostitute’s point of view, it’s intercourse, but not sexual intercourse. It’s just commercial intercourse.
Anyone tired of the Daniels/Avenatti act yet?
But don't the Ohio Police know that Stormey's audience comes out and pays money to experience her personality and loving smile. Sexual touching would be the last thing that could happen at these Modern Dance Exhibitions. That's Trump's story and he is sticking to it that there was no sticking.
I think the problem here is the other girls in Ohio can't do that type of thing and get better tips. So a celebrity comes to town and doesn't follow the rules.
My guess some crackhead dancer snitched.
Daniels needs a better lawyer too. A lawyers job is to keep is client out of trouble.
For the dancer — the person arrested — it's not sexual.
O body swayed to music, O brightening glance,
How can we know the dancer from the dance?
For the dancer — the person arrested — it's not sexual.
Fake orgasms.
Practice Tip: Coverage of the on going magnificent European Tour de Trump must be replaced with something. And Sex with Stormy is the perfect distraction story worth a week of repetition.
Did she grab anyone by the pussy?
As a guy in NJ said about Columbus in the 70s, it's like visiting the 1950s.
Stormy was charging $10,000 for something in Washington D.C. a few weeks back. What? You'll have to pay to find out--according to her spokeswoman.
"This law gives the cops an easy chance to look the other way for a small fee or other perk."
One of them put his face between two of her perks, but apparently tbat wasn't bribe enough.
I wonder what the Blue Lives Matter think of this great PR for the force.
John Tierney on strip clubs in the NYT back when the paper was occasionally interesting.
Whether or not the act itself is criminal, we need to view this gem by United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart to describe his threshold test for obscenity in Jacobellis v. Ohio... Though "I know it when I see it"
I'm NE of Columbus but too far NE to have anything but soybean and corn fields. Also, a few miles away, a server farm.
Stormy and/or Avenatti should run for Congress!
Obscene has lost its sexual component.
I know it when I feel it.
“Riders On The Stormy”
Shades of Miami
Club operators know the law, know the local cops and how they enforce the law and would have known enough to apprise the performer of the local ordinances. I read about her appearance in another state and the part of the act where she allows patrons to stick dollar bills to her greased up boobs and sticks them in the faces of the front row people. My first thought was "they can't do that in California," where we have strict separation of performer and patron.
So my hunch is she knew, or certainly should have known. On the other hand, a decent defense might be "I diagrammed that sentence and still couldn't stay awake reading to the end." Not so much ignorance of the law as lack of endurance towards the law.
Avanetti is still her lawyer?
The “immediate family” clause is there so that kids can give mom a hug before she gets on stage to go to work.
Columbus is a family oriented city.
She might be breastfeeding her baby as well.
Republicans, always playing lawfare against their enemies.
Now that clockboy's appeal went up in smoke, I think that phase is over.
It's a long, long road
From which there is no return
While we're on the way to there
Why not share
He ain't horny he's my brother
Bill from Texas,
Who's Avenatti's client, here?
Stormy is a client, he claims. But if someone else is paying her fees, aren't they a client as well?
Perhaps that client's goal is not keeping her out of trouble but ginning up maximum publicity.
That might also be Stormy's goal.
"Banned in Boston" used to give certain acts, books, records cachet and was actively promoted.
"Ticketed in Columbus" doesn't have the same cachet, but then neither does she. I guess she just has to work with what she's got.
As someone else noted, she may have set the whole thing up. Or, the club owner might have done it without her knowledge. Good free publicity.
John Henry
I spent a week in Columbus a couple years ago.
It is still like the 50's
That's not necessarily a bad thing. I liked the little bit I saw of it.
John Henry
When they got her to the police station, was she strip searched?
Surprised nobody came up with that before me.
The law is essentially “no having fun in an unacceptable manner.” It is also a mistake, and a frequent feminist conceit, to assume there is no sexual pleasure on the part of the dancer. There may not be, but in some cases, there is quite a lot.
How long until MSNBC compares this to Putin having Pussy Riot arrested?
"Republicans, always playing lawfare against their enemies."
Satire. Irony? What's the word for that statement?
Stormy might consider taking up smoking. It could change her career. Years ago when my father would give me the money he'd send me to the corner store to buy his smokes. Along with the cigarette pack would come a book of matches, a great place to put ads as the marketers found out. Stormy would soon find out, each time she lit up, that she could become an accountant, a private eye, an artist, TV repair lady (vacuum tubes only), an AC specialist, or door-to-door seller of encyclopedias, or 00s of other career choices where making "big money in your spare time" awaited.
Many of these great careers came out of Chicago, from LaSalle Extension U or the Wayne School, though a fair number were based in LA. Regardless, Stormy's present career of nuzzling customers with her breasts may be on a downward trend as gravity takes her breasts on a downward trend. So take up smoking, Stormy, it could really turn your life around.
"United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart to describe his threshold test for obscenity in Jacobellis v. Ohio... Though "I know it when I see it"" -
- but not when he is doing it.!!??
"so, incest shows are legal in ohio?"
Sister Act II. That's one strangely worded ordinance.
I'm too obsessed with the quote placing her "on the stage in a nonsexual manner" to pay attention to the details. Couldn't the NYT added a comma or something to fix Avenatti's dangler?
"I know it when I can't see anything because my face is buried in a bodacious set of tata's."
Armstrong and Getty explain: she was arrested for motorboating.
Does this arrest enhance or limit her commercial appeal? I can't se how this hurts. The people she should watch out for are the IRS agents......I understand that a lot of porn stars make the big money by doing escort work. She must be a premium brand in the escort field. By appointment to HRH cachet.
“ Ralph L said...
It would not surprise me if her lawyer put the police up to this.”
Or Daniels did it deliberately to generate the narrative that Mark floats at 7:36. To monetize the hysterics of The Resistance you need to continually present them with shiny baubles. And anyone as déclassé as a porn actress is not going to hold their attention for long. Even the Golden Shower Left needs to bathe occasionally.
She certainly profited more from her affair than Monica Lewinksi or even Paula Jones did. There's a difference between a pro and an amateur in handling such matters.
The news reports say that this particular law is never enforced, but I'm pretty sure it's commonly cited in other local news whenever the community manages to shut down a strip joint. (Except for cases of drug dealing and outright prostitution) I can't cite any articles to link to, but I knew this was a law and the only way I would know that was from reading it in newspapers before because I have never set foot in a strip club and don't keep up with their business models. I only know about them from what I read in newspapers.
I've heard from friends that most Gentlemen's Clubs (aka: strip clubs) ban patrons from touching the dancers. I'd not heard from them that touching by the dancer was banned. It makes sense to do so if you don't want the patron reciprocating.
-sw
“ A cigar in the hoohoo - not sex. ”
I think the correct term is “hooha.” I heard it on House.
Ralph L said...
"They even have the ostrich feather fans that burlesque woman, whose name escapes me, used."
Sally Rand:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTEIWK9CaEs
Blue on blue, woman on woman.
Her infamy made her a target by local police. Not every community wants her visiting their locale hence laws to be used to discourage the unsavory.
Oh dear, her pimp is complaining in the media that his whore got arrested.
Will no one thing of the washed up old tramp?
THOT PATROLLED!
Stormy got her Fame Visa stamped. She's good for another 15 minutes.
Showboating is legal, motorboating is not.
If you can smoke dope, and gamble for the benefit of children's education, you should be able to masturbate in a whorehouse.
Headline: "Stormy Daniels Arrested in Whorehouse for Acting like a Whore"
Film at 11...
Of course the Lefty's see conspiracies since that seems to be the modus operandi.
Could be a set up by her attorney to make her relevant. (She isn't)
Could be a jilted dancer hating a headliner.
Stormy advertises. It's how she makes her money. So EVERYONE who pays attention to that side of business knew exactly where she would be and when she would be there. Anyone with a grudge, or any Republican law enforcement official could have done this in his (or her) very own.
Is it a law Yes/No?
Did she break it Yes/No?
Doesn't matter if it is seldom applied.
But Dems, Libs and Chuck all want exceptions made for 'people we find useful'.
One day, they might not find the Clinton's useful and then Bubba will be up on some rape charges and The Hill for corruption and destruction of evidence.
But they still have a couple of uses for Stormy, so they demand everyone ignore the law to protect their minions...as usual.
Who's paying Avenatti? Stormy said it wasn't her, a few months back.
Mark: "I heard they have never charged anyone based on this 2007 law until now."
We should ask Paul Manafort about that...oh. We cant. He's in solitary confinement after having his wife felt up while in her nightgown in a no knock raid.
Plus, emoluments!
Mark: "One of them put his face between two of her perks, but apparently tbat wasn't bribe enough.
I wonder what the Blue Lives Matter think
of this great PR for the force."
Its the greatest recruiting tool ever?
FIDO said...
...
...
But Dems, Libs and Chuck all want exceptions made for 'people we find useful'.
Where did I say that I wanted some kind of exception made?
Hint: I didn't. I never said, and never suggested, anything like that.
It is not going to help Trump at all, if Stormy Daniels is made to appear non-credible. I know I'm not a Stormy Daniels fan. I could not care less about her. Her personal relationship with Trump no longer matters at all. All that matters are the financial details. As Althouse says, the fact that Donald J. Trump is a slimeball lying dirty adulterer was already baked into the electoral TrumpCake. Now, what we want to know is if Trump is also a felon, on grounds of bank fraud, mail fraud, money laundering or campaign finance violations. That is now all on the financial records and the communications on Michael Cohen's large collection of mobile phones and other electronic devices.
chuck still panty sniffing, I see.
Drago said...
Mark: "I heard they have never charged anyone based on this 2007 law until now."
We should ask Paul Manafort about that...oh. We cant. He's in solitary confinement after having his wife felt up while in her nightgown in a no knock raid.
Sorry.
You know I caught this Stormy Daniels act 55 years ago as a college youth going to the Blue Fox club in Tijuana. The "dancers" up on the stage would come to the edge of the stage and shove their boobs into the faces of the drunken patrons. I always sat well away from the stage. If the "dancers" were a little more enthusiastic, they would shove their crotches into the faces of the drunken louts lining up at the edge. When they got through with their "dance numbers" some of them went out into the audience soliciting customers for blow jobs. Or they'd take their customers upstairs for what even Billy Jeff would acknowledge as "sex".
Somehow I think Stormy would have been hired at the Blue Fox. She would have been a star--a natural blonde and all versus the poor young women up from central Mexico. As for me, I can report that the Tecate beer was good, and I partook of nothing else.
Chuck, this is not what you said before you blew your wad. You hoped that the adultery would hurt him.
It didn't.
Now you hope that that very questionable raid on Cohen's law office will yield some dirt. That Mueller was not illegally acting outside of his authority, or requesting NY DAs office to do the same.
"A Man for All Seasons" had a perfect quote for you, Mr. Roper:
Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you — where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man's laws, not God's — and if you cut them down — and you're just the man to do it — d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake.
That is why I trust you and your ilk far less than Trump.
And you a supposed lawyer.
Three officers were involved.
Therefore I conclude the donut shop across the street was closed.
In Ohio, it's called the Sister Sledge law.
"Now, what we want to know is if Trump is also a felon, on grounds of bank fraud, mail fraud, money laundering or campaign finance violations."
-- Eh, given what Edwards got away with, I find it very hard to condemn Trump, even if he did pay a stripper to not mention their affair. It'd need to be a lot worse than that to ding Trump legally. And, that, was pretty bad.
(Also, given we know a lot about Clinton, the Appalachian Trail, etc., etc., I think it is really, really hard to get a politician in legal trouble for giving a mistress money. The tortured reasoning of "it is a campaign expenditure!" gets really hard to accept, unless we start considering EVERYTHING politicians do campaign expenditures. It might hold legal water, but, eh... I'm not buying it yet. And this is from someone 100% convinced Trump had the affair.)
I am familiar with Columbus, so I googled the location.
That...is not the high dollar part of Columbus. Granted, there are very few strip clubs in affluent neighborhoods, but that are is distinctly blue collar neighborhood.
Stormy has money issues. This raises two points:
1) She is not being financed by someone high up there. Otherwise she'd be at home with her kid and not shaking her ass for dollar bills. No woman who sat on a large pile of money wants to shake her ass for perverts, particularly when she is in her forties.
2) Avenatti, who IS a high dollar lawyer...is still happy to take care of Stormy. Who exactly is paying his bills again?
Selective curiosity by Chuck, is, as always, telling.
So the question of 'who arranged this sting' also bring up 'who is pulling Slimewad's strings?
There are SEVERAL bad actors engaged here.
Send lawyers, guns and money.
The tit has hit the man.
"We should ask Paul Manafort about that...oh. We cant. He's in solitary confinement after having his wife felt up while in her nightgown in a no knock raid."
He has a cell phone in jail, so yes you can ask him.
Are you suggesting he be put with a roommate? Cue the Deliverance banjos ...
FIDO said...
Chuck, this is not what you said before you blew your wad. You hoped that the adultery would hurt him.
...
...
Quote me. I know very well "what I said before." And in fact what I have said before was that I don't really see much good evidence of anything like "collusion" with Russians in any election.
Instead, what I see is a great possibility that a federal prosecutor in Washington DC or in New York City might find some grounds that would merit an indictment of Trump (if such an indictment can even be made) on all of the hinky shit he's been doing privately for years. And what I was hoping for was not some grand theory that Trumpists can argue about. What I wanted was evidence of a discrete federal crime that was so absolutely convincing that even Sean Hannity would be forced to admit it.
I never said that mere adultery would hurt Trump with his base. What I've said all aoong was that Trump was right, and that he really could shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue and his base wouldn't care. Which is an indictment of Trump's base. Effectively an insulting taunt by Trump against that base, but nobody even cares.
FIDO said...
And you a supposed lawyer.
Yep. All I want is legal clarity. Relentless, unforgiving legal clarity.
Mark said...
"We should ask Paul Manafort about that...oh. We cant. He's in solitary confinement after having his wife felt up while in her nightgown in a no knock raid."
He has a cell phone in jail, so yes you can ask him.
LOL. Or an email on the computer that his lawyers having been bringing into and out of the jail.
https://www.npr.org/2018/07/11/628055395/prosecutors-object-to-manafort-bid-to-delay-trial-saying-hes-treated-like-vip
Matthew Sablan said...
"Now, what we want to know is if Trump is also a felon, on grounds of bank fraud, mail fraud, money laundering or campaign finance violations."
-- Eh, given what Edwards got away with, I find it very hard to condemn Trump, even if he did pay a stripper to not mention their affair. It'd need to be a lot worse than that to ding Trump legally. And, that, was pretty bad.
Matthew, please remember that Edwards was indicted and was taken to trial. Are you okay if Trump is indicted and taken to trial if the evidence shows an equivalent scheme to pay off a mistress in order to advance a political campaign?
If Trump could shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue, please make it be Chuck.
No jury would convict.
chuck seems addicted to panty sniffing.
Sad. Now he is adding delusion about Trump being indicted.
I think chuck is going for the Maxine Waters vote.
"Are you okay if Trump is indicted and taken to trial if the evidence shows an equivalent scheme to pay off a mistress in order to advance a political campaign?"
-- If the evidence is there, sure. I just in general don't think any expenditure by a candidate should be considered a campaign expenditure. I don't think a prosecutor should bring a case where the evidence is similar to the Edwards case, because that case lost, but if a prosecutor wants to try for it, and they have evidence, eh, I suppose they can try. It'd be fun to find a jury for it too; we'd need Conan to do his man on the street interviews and grab the people who don't know who the president is.
Whores gonna whore.
if the evidence shows an equivalent scheme to pay off a mistress in order to advance a political campaign?"
Is that a crime? Lots of politicians would be in jail. Bill Clinton perjured himself and got his law license yanked.
Are you really a lawyer, chuck ? That sounds like a lawyer who got his degree from a Crackerjack box top.
A federal grand jury in North Carolina indicted Edwards in 2011 on six felony charges of violating multiple federal campaign contribution laws to cover up an extramarital affair to which he admitted, following his 2008 campaign. Edwards was found not guilty on one count, and the judge declared a mistrial on the remaining five charges, as the jury was unable to come to an agreement.
If Trump paid her off, he used his own money as best I can tell. Edwards used campaign money and still wasn't convicted.
chuck, are you sure you are a lawyer ?
"chuck, are you sure you are a lawyer ?"
4th tier toilet of a community clown college Cooley attendee? Likely.
Multiple bar exam failure? Almost certainly.
So the answer is no, Chuck is not. It is just on the list of things that he pretends to be on the internet, including a Republican and a biological male.
Trump can use his own money any way he wants. If he wanted to secure a NDA from someone that approached him, in order to stop a last minute shit storm, that is perfectly legal. The last I heard, the Trump campaign never listed the expense on campaign filings. That means it wasn't campaign money used. And was Stormy ever interviewed for possible blackmail charges?
How did Hillary get those people to drop lawsuits against the two worthless "Clinton University" programs? {I recall those lawsuits being mentioned} Probably with threats and intimidation from local Democrat-controlled government agencies, but possibly with under-the-table "settlements"? Were those listed on campaign filings or not?
Michael K said...
A federal grand jury in North Carolina indicted Edwards in 2011 on six felony charges of violating multiple federal campaign contribution laws to cover up an extramarital affair to which he admitted, following his 2008 campaign. Edwards was found not guilty on one count, and the judge declared a mistrial on the remaining five charges, as the jury was unable to come to an agreement.
If Trump paid her off, he used his own money as best I can tell. Edwards used campaign money and still wasn't convicted.
chuck, are you sure you are a lawyer ?
Why do you write shit like that?
So, Doctor Jerkoff; the point is that it doesn't matter if it was Trump's money or Cohen's money or your money. What matters is that it is a campaign expenditure and must be reported.
Now, it may be more nuanced than that but you didn't make that argument. You shot from the hip and then had the fucking nerve to ask if I am sure that I am a lawyer.
Here's the Harvard Law Review Blog on the subject. It is a hell of a lot more interesting than you are. Note well, Dr. Non-Lawyer; this blog post stuck pretty tightly to the FEC considerations, and not any of the issues that could pertain if money was secretly funneled to Trump or the Trump campaign or from the Trump campaign (or Cohen) in ways that could foil banking laws, the tax code, or federal mail fraud laws.
https://blog.harvardlawreview.org/the-coming-storm-hush-money-and-the-federal-election-campaign-act/
I would argue she is not an "employee"
President-Mom-Jeans said...
"chuck, are you sure you are a lawyer ?"
4th tier toilet of a community clown college Cooley attendee? Likely.
Multiple bar exam failure? Almost certainly.
So the answer is no, Chuck is not. It is just on the list of things that he pretends to be on the internet, including a Republican and a biological male.
I passed the bar on my first and only attempt.
And aren't you the same jackass who earlier ribbed me about having gone to Cooley Law School? I didn't go to Cooley. But Trump's own Michael Cohen did. (LULZ.)
The rest of your dumb commentary, and all of Darrell's, is too stupid for me to waste my time. That is in fact the worst insult I can deliver; your point is too stupid for me to be bothered...
Well, I may not be a lawyer, but I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express in my life, and IIRC, a PRESIDENT can only be removed for Treason, Bribery and High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
So what is a 'high crime and misdemeanor'.
The convention adopted “high crimes and misdemeanors” with little discussion. Most of the framers knew the phrase well. Since 1386, the English parliament had used “high crimes and misdemeanors” as one of the grounds to impeach officials of the crown. Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, not spending money allocated by Parliament, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, losing a ship by neglecting to moor it, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” granting warrants without cause, and bribery. Some of these charges were crimes. Others were not. The one common denominator in all these accusations was that the official had somehow abused the power of his office and was unfit to serve.
To which, feckless Chuck does NOT want to charge and remove Trump for abuses in office as he has, according to himself, already granted that the Russian Collusion story is unsucc...I mean not credible.
He wishes to remove a president he doesn't like for supposed crimes he committed before he was in office and which are NOT 'high crimes or misdemeanors'.
And you say you wish legal clarity.
You are a liar. You, Mr. Chuck Roper, are happy to cut down all the trees to get to your Devil. Well, little Hatchetman, I wish to stop you, for my own sake, because you are a fool.
This will be catch and release. How does Stormy fit the definition, “employee who regularly appears ...” She’s probably not an employee of the strip club, and probably not making regular appearances. Another legal loophole, the statute only covers patrons and employees. So Stormy could grope the strip club owner without violating the statute. Likewise, there is an argument that the undercover officers aren’t patrons within the meaning of the statute. Also, as not being a family member is an element of the crime, the state of Ohio will have to prove that the patrons touched were not family members of Stormy.
Sure Chuck, whatever lies you like to tell on the internet. Like that you worked at Westminster Palace, or that you are not an involuntary virgin.
So, Doctor Jerkoff; the point is that it doesn't matter if it was Trump's money or Cohen's money or your money. What matters is that it is a campaign expenditure and must be reported.
chuck is such a charmer when challenged about his alleged legal skills.
I think an argument could be made that it was not a "campaign expenditure."
But not, of course, by a "lawyer" who got his degree online from Nigeria.
On further reflection, it seems to me that all this publicity has probably hurt the escort side of Stormy's business. One of the most important, albeit not the most desirable, quality an escort can have is her discretion. It's good to be famous but not to be famous for outing your clients. Maybe that's why she's still out there stripping. Stripping is a young woman's game. It's sad to see a woman her age still up there struggling to make the moves.
chuck thinks that politicians have to list grocery purchases on FEC forms.
When you get your law degree from a Nigerian Prince, well who knows what you will say.
President-Mom-Jeans said...
Sure Chuck, whatever lies you like to tell on the internet. Like that you worked at Westminster Palace, or that you are not an involuntary virgin.
Haha! I DID! I really did work at "Westminster Palace." In fact, it is properly "the Palace of Westminster" and it is the building that generally houses the UK House of Lords (didn't work there) and the House of Commons. (I was an intern for a member of the UK House of Commons whilst a Michigan undergrad majoring in political science.) And technically, my office was not in the House, but rather in what used to be the Old Scotland Yard and was then renamed "Norman Shaw North."
I can't think of anything sorrier than a sorry-ass democrat whore.
About the idea of arguing that she’s not an employee, read the whole statute:
“(5) "Employee" means any individual who performs any service on the premises of a sexually oriented business on a full-time, part-time, or contract basis, regardless of whether the individual is denominated an employee, independent contractor, agent, or otherwise, but does not include an individual exclusively on the premises for repair or maintenance of the premises or for the delivery of goods to the premises.”
your point is too stupid for me to be bothered
As are you.
Different arrows for different targets.
I think an argument could be made that it was not a "campaign expenditure."
So does everyone with a brain. If it's not listed as a campaign expenditure it isn't. And if you use your own money, it's nobody's business. The laws were set up to prevent converting campaign funds raised to personal use, not vice versa.
Ask Chuck about Westminster Abbey, the Tower of Big Ben, and the rosy red cheeks of the little children. And titty twisting.
Chuck,
If you don't stop it, at some point you'll go blind. Or so I've heard.
"I passed the bar on my first and only attempt."
Well at least we know that Chuck is not an idiot, as only an idiot would take the bar exam after already passing it.
poor chuck. We should stop teasing him but he is such a big target.
He has the sense of humor usually seen in a Nancy Pelosi Democrats.
"How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?" That not funny!
That's our chuck. He has a much a sense of humor as Inga, and her vocabulary when she runs out of things intelligent to say.
Hey!
http://www.wrdw.com/content/news/Lawyer-Stormy-Daniels-arrested-at-Ohio-strip-club-487999521.html
Charges dropped.
So?
She's your girl again?
Local prosecutors can't be bothered to do their job.
These kind of laws are really nothing more than "get the fuck out of town" laws.
Democrat interference?
Deep State?
Laika the Space Dog?
Charges dropped.
It turned out she was related to the cops.
"I've determined that these crimes were not committed, based on the fact that Ms. Clifford has not made regular appearances at this establishment as required under the law," Columbus City Attorney Zach Klein said in a statement after reviewing the case."
"Employee" means any individual who performs any service on the premises of a sexually oriented business on a full-time, part-time, or contract basis,"
Seems like a contradiction to me, but then I've never stayed at those motels that make you smarter.
Blogger Ralph L said...
Charges dropped.
It turned out she was related to the cops.
How many blowjobs did that entail?
So, the stray voltage theory would say this was all just to keep Stzork from being a bigger story. My answer? People do stupid things.
With the charges being dropped, this looks more like blue on blue for the intent to distract. I agree with Sablan, 15 more minutes of fame for Stormy to avoid Stzork getting wet minutes of fame.
Must get back to the real reason Hillary lost the election.
Russia
No word from the hack media why Strozk changed the words around so that Hillary, his candidate of choice, is off the hook for her felonies.
Lock her up! Lock her up!
It's illegal to pay-off hookers and sluts and it's illegal to criticize Hillary.
I don't think there's any real conspiracy. Or, if there is, it is much more likely to be small-ball stuff like local strippers annoyed that the law was turning a blind eye to the new person's blatantly illegal act.
Stormy gets off! And I was looking forward to the televised trial with the defense resting after the prosecution failed to put on sufficient evidence that the police officers and patrons weren't related to Stormy. "They could all be brothers and sisters by another mother!"
Or, "Stormy, would you demonstrate to the jury the contact for which you are being tried."
So, in addition to mocking disabled veterans being OK, now in this age of #MeToo, it's suddenly OK to slap people in public with your breasts?
Please let's dispense with this latest practice of going out of one's way to be obtuse.
I've been to Sirens. I went during lunch with a female co-worker who has a dancer friend there. It's not what I would call upscale. We sat in the farthest corner from the stage. Her friend wasn't dancing at the time, but another woman who had a c-section scar was. I had a Coke. Did not eat. That was at least 12 years ago, maybe more.
Forget that statute. A woman slapping people in the face with her bare breasts without first getting their express consent is called sexual battery.
"Forget that statute. A woman slapping people in the face with her bare breasts without first getting their express consent is called sexual battery."
One can argue that by entering the premises one surrenders their objections to the contact. I mean, think about it.
No, merely entering a strip joint is not consent to a sexual battery, no matter how condescendingly you might suggest that it is.
There is no sex ... in the Champagne Room ...
Stormy should argue that her breasts aren't real, therefor the statute doesn't apply.
Joe wins the thread! Joe wins the thread!
OT Peter Strozk is a corrupt pile of shit. What an embarrassment to the FBI.
OT: James Woods has the 2018 campaign ad stillz ready to go.
Strozk - the face of the 2018 and 2020 election.
Thank you!
What an important thing to legislate against: Touching. I feel so much safer knowing that strip club patrons and dancers can't touch each other. You don't even know. What a relief.
Michael K said...
Blogger Ralph L said...
Charges dropped.
It turned out she was related to the cops.
How many blowjobs did that entail?
7/12/18, 1:08 PM
Mike, as a doctor, you should understand it doesn't work that way.
"So, in addition to mocking disabled veterans being OK"
I thought Palins problem was that she was being mocked.
I have seen zero evidence that Cohen was mocking disabled vets, just allegations. You know, like Manafort being guilty or Trump being punked by Rocket Man,
Mike, as a doctor, you should understand it doesn't work that way.
Not being a cop, I cannot comment on how many blowjobs= charges dismissed.
Maybe the prosecutor?
I have seen zero evidence that Cohen was mocking disabled vets, just allegations.
I understand it has not yet been shown.
"Stormy gets off!"
I thought the john was suppose to get off not the whore democrat.
So Stormy's breasts are fake news?
Stormy expected to make about $3-5 Grand that night.
She didn't.
And her other venues later this year have to question whether they want to have that kind of notoriety. Maybe. Now EVERYONE knows about the strip club Sirens in Columbus Ohio (Grilled cat buffet during the weekly lunch special)
But suddenly having a 'big ticket day' turn into a cop fest really harshs the free spending buzz that bar owners and strippers like.
IF this was a conspiracy, it was pretty masterful: her income stream has dropped, her credibility has dropped, and someone has whispered in her ear 'Remember thou art mortal' with one dropped charge.
Michael K said...
Mike, as a doctor, you should understand it doesn't work that way.
Not being a cop, I cannot comment on how many blowjobs= charges dismissed.
Maybe the prosecutor?
7/12/18, 7:31 PM
Lol. Doc, you don't get relatives with blowjobs, that's what girls do to avoid getting relatives; you get relatives with PIV (penis in vagina) sex. Children.
Ba-dump-bump.
"No, merely entering a strip joint is not consent to a sexual battery, no matter how condescendingly you might suggest that it is."
Your sarcasm meter is broken dipshit.
Lol. Doc, you don't get relatives with blowjobs,
What dos that have to do with getting charges dismissed ?
I even know about that P in V stuff.
If storks bring white babies and crows bring black babies, what brings no babies at all ?
Swallows.
Mike, I'm sorry, if you have to explain the joke, it's not funny. You said something to the effect of "were the cops relatives? how many blowjobs did that take," and... If she'd fucked the cops, or, obviously, others in their families, she could have created family connections by blood. Or I suppose she could have married in.
Since you know the swallows joke, obviously I didn't put it across correctly. Sigh.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा