Judge Getting Ready To Toss Out Stormy Daniels Defamation Suit

Everything about Stormy Daniels screams cash grab and this defamation lawsuit of hers is no different.

Defamation lawsuits by their nature are kind of interesting beings. When you really think about what is being said when someone files one the message is quite clear.

A person that files a defamation lawsuit is effectively saying that a person’s reputation has been so damaged by claims that another person is making that they are unable to make a living in the way that which they have become accustomed.

For example, if a person was falsely accused of theft and they were unable to make a living as the manager of a retail store because nobody wants to hire them they could sue for the wages that they lost if they were due a promotion.

It’s one of those things that is taken seriously and is given a lot more examination that someone contesting a parking ticket where the no parking sign was spun around the wrong way.

Back to Stormy Daniels. If she is suing for defamation of character and her line of work was/is having sex with people of questionable character on camera and then raking in the profits of people watching the recordings how in the heck could someone defame her character?

A federal judge appeared poised Monday to toss out a defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump by porn actress Stormy Daniels.

Judge S. James Otero said in U.S. District Court that a tweet the president wrote in April appears to be “rhetorical hyperbole” and speech protected under the First Amendment.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, sued Trump in April after he said a composite sketch of a man she said threatened her in 2011 to keep quiet about an alleged affair with the real estate mogul was a “con job.”

Trump tweeted that the man was “nonexistent” and that Daniels was playing the “fake news media for fools.” He retweeted a side-by-side photo comparing the sketch with a photo of Daniels’ husband.

Otero said he would rule later, but that Trump’s statement seemed like an opinion and speech protected under the First Amendment.

“To allow the complaint to go forward and to have one consider this to be defamatory in the context it was made would have a chilling effect,” Otero said.

Attorney Ken White who blogs about the case and talks about it on the podcast “All the President’s Lawyers” said he thinks Otero wrote a tentative ruling that he would finalize and issue soon.

Read More