Stormy Daniels Actions Against Trump Claiming “Hush Agreement” is Invalid

73
Stormy Daniels
Stormy Daniels

Stormy Daniels, an adult film star now suing President Donald Trump claiming the non-closure agreement about 2006 alleged affair is invalid because Trump never signed it. Daniels attorney – has filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court, according to NBC News report.

However, attorney of Trump Michael Cohen was alleged. But Trump himself has not signed the “hush agreement” – paying $130,000 to Daniels in an exchange to maintain silence about her tryst with Trump.

Attorney of Daniel, Michael Avenatti has posted the court filing online copy. The suit, in fact, alleges the Trump an Daniels to enter into such agreement under pseudonyms –  Daniels as “Peggy Peterson” and Trump as “David Dennison”. But where Trump with the name David Dennison remained empty.

The affair of Stormy Daniels and Hush Agreement

When other women made a step forward to allege sexual misconduct of Trump, Daniels had a curiosity to say about her story with Trump publicly. The Trump campaign made their attention, the lawsuit quotes. Cohen, “aggressively sought to silence Ms. Clifford [Daniels] as part of an effort to avoid her telling the truth. Thus helping to ensure he won the Presidential Election.”

Daniels has entered into the Hush Agreement on October 28 – a few days before the election.

The slow-burning saga was piled in lawsuit began in January. Michael Cohen paid $130,000 to Daniels in hush money earlier month of president elections shot up. Trump had an affair with porn actress at his celebrity Golf in Lake Tahoe in 2006.

This porn star was paid to keep silence of relationship with Donald Trump

Trump later has denied the affair. Before appearing on Jimmy Kimmel Live,   she denied the affair. Moreover, it does not stop here. Later, Trump and the porn star had continued the affair till 2007 and met at a Bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Cohen pay of $130,000 still remained unclear from the organization of the Trump. The watchdog scrutinized the transactions and pointed out the transaction as a campaign-finance violation.