Client Disclosure Agreement Clifford A Llc: Fill & Download for Free

That is one of the precise questions that is being litigated in Clifford (aka Daniels) vs Trump et al. It is alleged by the plaintiff that it was mutually understood by all of parties to the “Hush Agreement”, before entering into the contract, that, unless all parties to the agreement signed it, all agreements and terms and conditions would be null and void. Therefore plaintiff is seeking declaratory relief from a judge, that is, that both mentioned agreements (which are not public) be declared null and void, and unenforceable and invalid, by a judge with proper jurisdiction.Donald Trump et al., defendants, can obviously go right ahead and dispute the complaint in court.Simply read #21–24 of the complaint below.https://pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/stormy-daniels-trump-lawsuit-wm2.pdfIn my opinion, this lawsuit has been brought as a direct threat to Trump. He should not wish for it to proceed any further, not unless he is a fool. It is a potential nightmare for him. In that connection I’ll simply bring up two names: Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp.It is the lawsuit itself which poses a big risk for Trump. It’s not the story of the affair. The affair is common knowledge now. Everyone who matters knows already, for certain sure, that the affair happened. But the lawsuit may well pose a serious threat to Trump, since there is going to have to be discovery by the plaintiff’s lawyer related to the precise way in which the contract was established.If the payment was illegal under federal campaign finance laws, which seems pretty likely, then I don’t think that the contract can be valid and binding.If, on the other hand, it is the case that Michael Cohen’s astonishing public statements about the way in which this contract was established are actually true, that Trump’s Organization and Trump’s Campaign were not involved and that, by implication, Trump himself didn’t know anything about the agreement or about Mr. Cohen’s subsequent actions in the matter: if all of that is true, so that Mr. Cohen did not inform Trump directly of all the obligations that were placed on him by the agreement, then I suspect that the contract is null and void, and that Cohen should probably be disbarred for actions that he took on behalf of his client, Donald Trump, that Trump did not know of, and that therefore would be highly unethical.Trump, if he had had any sense, would have been working as hard as possible to get this lawsuit shut down long before it ever got to this point. He should have cut another deal with Daniels.Trump may have met his match in Stormy Daniels. He probably should have had his fixers cough up more than $130,000 in 2016. For someone like Donald Trump, $130,000 is really no more than what he might expect to spend on a cheap date. Daniels should have demanded a lot more. It almost seems as if no one involved really thought that Trump would actually win the election.On the other hand - Stormy Daniels apparently signed the contract under one of her pseudonyms, Peggy Peterson, and she apparently did receive payment for her silence. Trump didn’t sign the contract under what is said to be his pseudonym, David Denison, but Michael Cohen’s cut out corporation, Essential Consultants, LLC, apparently did. The arbitrator apparently has issued a TRO restraining Daniels from speaking for now. The complaint, however, claims that Mr. Cohen did not timely and properly inform Daniels of such arbitration, and that his pattern of behaviour has been otherwise “coercive”. On the face of it, the facts all indicate that there is, at least in form, a contract.Stormy Daniels now wants the contract to be broken for obvious reasons.She wants to be released from the non-disclosure clause of the contract she signed, with the cut out corporation that Donald Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen set up, so that she will not be subject to a $1 million dollar financial penalty for each and every violation of the non-disclosure agreement.Her story is now worth well more than the $130,000 she was paid, since Trump won election to the Presidency. It’s quite likely that her story is worth somewhere in the millions if it comes out now, or even any time in the near future. So she’s suing to have the contract declared completely null and void. The motive appears to be both financial and to pose a threat to Trump.There are probably any number of news organizations that will likely agree to pay any penalties and damages she would incur for speaking out and to pay to litigate and reduce those costs. So the contract will become unenforceable if she should decide to pursue that route. News organizations are certainly not obligated to respect any NDA that Stormy Daniels signed, whether it was part of a valid or an invalid contract.But her story in book form could clearly be worth a lot more to her, personally, if she can get the contract declared null and void.The most interesting question is what Stormy Daniels and her lawyer might be able to have exposed in court about the source of the $130,000 in hush money that she was actually paid, in litigation relating to the validity of the contract. That could well put to rest the transparent fiction that the Trump Organization was not involved, and that Trump’s long time lawyer Michael Cohen only “facilitated” the $130,000 dollar payment. If it can be established that the money came from Trump or anyone acting for the Trump campaign then there is potential legal jeopardy for Trump.I don’t know how much leverage Stormy Daniels actually has here, since I certainly don’t know what solid evidence she may be able to provide about the details of the affair, but I would say that, if Trump thinks there is any reason to believe that the payment might be traced back to him, then he should try to cut a deal under which Stormy Daniels is allowed to speak about the affair, which obviously did take place, but the details of the payment remain sealed.However, I suspect that it is also the case that Robert Mueller can find out all the details of the payment, should he wish to pursue this avenue of investigation, and I would say that it is obviously germane to any case that he may be building against Trump. If the $130,000 payment came from Trump himself or was ordered by him or any of his representatives, with his knowledge, then it establishes very clearly that Trump is susceptible to blackmail; that there are things he is willing to pay and go to great lengths to keep concealed. It would be even more amusing if that $130,000 were eventually traced back to some of Trump’s Russian oligarch friends.So, I suspect that at this point in time it may too late for even the great deal-maker Donald Trump (aka David Denison) to make a deal. This story looks like it just may be a gift that will keep on giving well past July.