Waterloo, Waterloo, where will you meet your Waterloo? Every puppy has his day, everybody has to pay, where will you meet your Waterloo? — Stonewall Jackson

This is another news item filed under the “If this was anybody else’s administration, this would be a BFD, but because it’s Trump, we yawn,” heading. The Hill:

A California court ordered President Trump to pay $44,100 to Stephanie Clifford, the adult film actress known as Stormy Daniels, to cover her legal fees regarding her nondisclosure agreement.

The order from California Superior Court Judge Robert Broadbelt, which was filed on Monday but posted online Friday by Clifford’s attorneys, surrounds a $130,000 nondisclosure agreement (NDA) with former attorney Michael Cohen in his capacity representing Trump. Clifford and Cohen both say Trump had an affair with the actress from 2006 to 2007, claims the president denies. […]

He also dismissed arguments from Trump’s attorneys that he was not responsible for covering the fees because he did not sign the NDA, ruling that because Trump had reimbursed Cohen for the $130,000 and since the president’s legal team had argued that a defamation suit from Clifford should be handled by an NDA arbiter, Trump was effectively a party to the deal.

This is a minor annoyance to Trump, undoubtedly, a mere gnat to swat away compared to the pterodactyl that is the Steve Bannon scandal. Bannon might flip and Trump really doesn’t need that, and especially now, 72 days out from the election.

Trump was asked at a news conference Friday about the fact that his associates keep getting indicted and convicted. His response was that, “there was overwhelming corruption in the Obama administration.” Right. Does anybody know how the evangelicals reconcile all this? It’s okay that Trump pays off porn stars because pro-life or something? I’d ask Jerry Falwell, Jr., but he seems to be off line these days.

Help keep the site running, consider supporting.


  1. Trump was asked at a news conference Friday about the fact that his associates keep getting indicted and convicted. His response was that, “there was overwhelming corruption in the Obama administration.”

    Prove it…waiting hmmm yea ok.

    • That was such a choice moment, among many such moments. He has no answers anymore when people call him on his bullshit. I don’t even know how he can show his face these days.

  2. I don’t recall “overwhelming corruption” in the Obama administration. Even Nixon’s wasn’t as corrupt as Himself’s, and we know his was crooked.

        • That “IRS scandal” was pure Republican shenanigans and you should be ashamed for even considering it as a “scandal” at all. The whole deal was the by-product of a GOP claim that the IRS “targeted” conservative groups over 501(c)(3) applications. You know what those are, right? Applications for NON-PROFIT status so these groups could get out of paying taxes while doing nothing but spewing right-wing propaganda (a genuine application is supposed to allow groups engaging in EDUCATING people about issues). The whole thing began after THOUSANDS of applications were received–mostly by TEA Party groups and affiliates–in the course of TWO YEARS, and with a vast majority of them openly using “TEA Party” or some form of the “TEA” phrase as part of the group name. Additionally, states with minuscule populations like North Dakota and Kansas were the base for DOZENS of these groups (and larger states like Ohio and Florida had HUNDREDS of these groups) filing applications. But, for some unfathomable reason, GOP Congresscritters could NOT understand why the IRS (the organization in charge of collecting the nation’s taxes) might be a bit skeptical over the claims of THOUSANDS of applications from groups whose SOLE motive was to preach how they’d been “Taxed Enough Already.” (The fact that the vast majority of these groups were backed by the Koch Brothers–whose name just happened to be mentioned on the applications–was also just a little bit concerning.) Also, it should be remembered that the IRS pointed out that liberal/progressive groups were targeted and investigated at the same RATE (it’s just there were far fewer of these groups filing applications compared to the conservative groups).

          Also, you’re really using CNN as a source? The same network that wouldn’t give Obama a break as President (not even in the “honeymoon” period) and would get 2 or 3 GOP responses to every single utterance by the Obama administration (and typically, the responses would be lengthier and less likely to be edited for broadcast purposes).

          As for “Fast and Furious,” the GOP was more than willing to OVERLOOK what Dubya’s administration had done while seeking to target the Obama administration’s behavior. (Incidentally, the GOP Congresscritters have a less-than-stellar record when it comes to a key aspect of what was at the heart of Dubya’s “Operation Wide Receiver” and the “Fast & Furious” deal: Straw purchasing. That’s when some “reputable” person goes in and buys guns and turns around and gives/sells them to criminals. The GOP won’t do anything about it because the NRA tells them it interferes with “legitimate” gun purchases by “law-abiding citizens.”)

          • Sadly, I don’t think Trump is even thinking about these two dust-ups. He thinks the scandals all involve Obama and Biden spying on his traitor trash ass.

          • Good grief. That was a prodigious waste of time. The question was whether there was any “hint of scandal,” not the particulars of any particular hint. Thus Cheryl’s point is well-taken.

          • The only thing Joseph didn’t cite, was the role of everyone’s favorite CA Republican asshat, Darrell Issa, in this. Issa went to the deputy IRS commissioner, a Republican, and asked him how many charitable groups had filed applications. Issa asked for a list showing only the conservative groups, which said commissioner promptly supplied. Then Issa goes on TV asserting that the IRS was targeting only conservative groups, etc. The truth never really caught with the allegations supplied by Issa…

            Fast and Furious was a carryover from Bush’s administration. It was a mistake. So that’s one compared to the oodles and oodles of rot emanating from the current NS regime. There is literally no comparison between 44 and 45. Equating the number of hints, or saying that there are hints to both sides, strikes me as bothsiderism to an extreme degree.

          • Who equated the number of hints or asserted there are hints to both sides? Trump scandals are far more than hints.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

The maximum upload file size: 128 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here