STORMY DANIELS: JUST BEING A BLACKMAILING WHORE.

ICHEOKU says there is certainly something in a name and Stormy Daniels is desperately trying to live up to her own name, stirring up a storm, admitted in a tea cup. No laws were broken and no crimes were committed. She is an adult and of age of consent. She consented to have sex and in fact had sex and was probably paid for her services. She was also paid to shut up her mouth and not say a thing about it. She agreed and her silence was forever purchased for $130,000. She took the money and ran. Case closed; except that the whoring daughter of Eve now wants to stir up some ripples, hence the current 'I took the money but will not keep my side of the bargain and wants to talk about it.'

So, what exactly is she now talking about or that constitutes the crux of the current hullabaloo, if one may ask? At least she was only fucked but not raped; and she willingly consented to it. So what is the complaint here or is she now saying that she did not collect the $130,000 to shut the hell up; or that the money is no longer enough to continuously ensure her purchased silence as she earlier bargained for? Is it possible that she is being used as a willing tool by the fake news media, which has since gone crest fallen because their previous obsession with the Russian Collusion has gone bust? Is Stormy Daniels now providing them with yet another intoxicating indulgence to binge on, with her story of having been fucked by somebody. She is a prostitute for crying out loud and prostitutes get fucked for a bargain, so no big deal? She was handsomely rewarded for her services and should therefore shut the hell up as bargained. 

ICHEOKU says it is both sad and pitiful to see American media gone with the wind of irrelevance as they no longer provide news information but indulge in salacious gossipy round the clock bantering. Stormy Daniels has now become their media's latest hallucinatory drug of choice as they left all important developing stories and go wall to wall with the coverage of the salacious story. ICHEOKU wonders what has become of them that they now thrive on gossipy, yellow journalism; instead of hard nosed investigative reporting of the yore, for which many veterans of the trade made their name and fortune. But today, it is an arm chair or rather high stool of rehashing stale development and they are not even ashamed of themselves or the thing they pass off as news. What is the news worthiness of such a salacious story of a call girl escort who leeches on men, hawking sex. A kind of story which ordinarily is and should be the mainstay of soft sell tabloids such as National Inquiry and Larry Flint's stable; but which the main media is now fighting and competing for a share of. The descent into depravity by these media houses is indeed shockingly incredible. 

Stormy Daniels entered into a valid, binding and enforceable contract to not say a word about an alleged sexual encounter she had with the president. An offer was made, the offer was accepted as made and a consideration was exchanged, thus consummating the contract. It was a "give me your silence and I will give you $130,000 in return, do we have a deal scenario. It was signed, sealed and delivered with an attached force of enforceability. Therefore it will violate the tenet and the very essence of contracts to allow her to wiggle out of her binding obligation under a contract for which she received adequate consideration. She was paid $130,000 in full satisfaction in exchange for her silence and she agreed to shut up. She gave up whatever rights she might have otherwise had, including the right to speak about the affair. Her eternal silence was bargained out, she sold it and it was purchased. Therefore, the court cannot and must not aid her vagrant disregard and intended violation of a duly executed valid contract. 

ICHEOKU is emphatic that the bargained for inducement is sufficient to consummate a contract and that in fact, a valid contract was indeed duly entered into between the parties. It is not illegal nor unlawful to enter into a contract of non disclosure; and sex between two consenting adults is not a crime which could have otherwise vitiated such contract or which could have made it to fall within the known exceptions. Therefore the arisen "zip it" contract is binding and enforceable against a party who received a sufficient consideration thereof, with intention to be bound by it, but who is now threatening to avoid it. Such an intention to breach must be checkmated with threat of punitive damages and prevented at all cost. 

Recall that Stormy Daniels had sued President Donald John Trump, claiming that because he did not sign the non-disclosure agreement between them, the contract is not valid. Her contention is that his omission to personally sign the contract rendered the contract invalid and therefore not binding on her; and that it does not have the force of preventing her from talking about the alleged affair. She said that because the real party to the contract, President Donald John Trump, never signed it, there is no enforceable valid contract between herself and the president. Stormy Daniels now wants the court to declare the contract invalid and also to lift the gag order on her, so that she can freely tell it all. 

ICHEOKU says what a contention standing on its head and spinning out of its axis, totally out of control. Whoever her lawyer is or whoever is advising her is just plain stupid and silly not to appreciate the fact that, except for personal contracts where performance is specifically expected of the party, that an agent can contractually bind his principal. It is a trite law that agents of principals can enter into valid contracts on behalf of their principals and as a matter of course, sign relevant contractual documents thereinto in the process. Also, such a do not tell, non disclosure agreement, of what already took place between Stormy Daniels and President Donald John Trump, does not fall under the personal contract exception, where a principal beneficiary is required to personally sign a contract. The president's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, was acting as an agent of his principal, President Trump, when he entered into the contract on his behalf and his signature is sufficient to validate the contract. 

What is imperative here is that at the time of signing the contract, the parties fully understood the bargain they made and the parties intended to be bound by it. The necessary intents were fully disclosed and agreed to by both parties; therefore the current argument by Stormy Daniels seeking to vitiate the contract for lack of the principal's signature lacks merit. The case should therefore be dismissed with prejudice. The determinative and dispositive issue here is whether Stormy Daniels, at the time the contract was signed, understood that Michael Cohen was an agent of and acting on his behalf of his principal, the then candidate Donald John Trump. Further, that following such understanding, she proceeded to receive a benefit therefrom in the form of a consideration, for the purpose of purchasing her silence. By the silence agreement which she entered into, a forbearance, she forfeited her right to ever utter a word about the alleged sexual dalliance. The other party also suffered a bargain of $130,000 which Stormy Daniels received in full and final consideration for the detriment to forever maintain her silence over the affair. 

ICHEOKU maintains that Stormy Daniels by collecting the $130,000 consummated a contract and her contractual obligation thereunder remains in effect and subsisting till date and continuing in eternity unless otherwise revoked or annulled or vitiated. At the time of entering into the bargain, she fully understood the terms and intention of the other party for her to be bound to silence and she agreed to it. An enforceable valid contract was thus created between Stormy Daniels and President Donald John Trump, regardless of who signed on behalf of the president. The other party performed his side of the bargain and Stormy Daniels cannot be allowed to pretend otherwise or to be clever by half by shirking her own obligation under the contract, regardless. She is therefore under a contractual obligation to keep her side of the bargain or suffer consequential damages for a willful breach thereof. 

The courts have times without numbers agreed with the notion that without contracts, society will be meaningless and very difficult to function. The courts regularly come to the aid of the smooth running of the wheels of society, including by maintaining contracts and ensuring that they are respected. This imperative to keep the society's wheels oiled and churning smoothly is always seen favorably with kinder eyes by the courts in deciding matters arising from breach of contractual obligations and enforcement of contracts, holding parties to a contract to their bargain. Stephanie Clifford, aka Stormy Daniels, is trying but will fail to disregard her obligation under a valid contract which she willingly and with clear eyes, entered into. 

ICHEOKU is emphatic that there was no attempts to intimidate Ms. Clifford into silence or to shut her up in order to protect the president. All that the party on the other side is asking for is that the contract the entered with Stormy Daniels be respected and agreed bargains kept to their letters. Ms Stormy Daniels freely negotiated and entered into the bargain; she received adequate consideration for so doing, but now wants to renege on it. So, if there is anyone trying to double dip here, it is Ms Daniels, who as a sex mercenary, is trying to double-profit from where she had already contractually agreed not to. Contractual agreements must be respected where not repugnant; and having sex and/or paying for it to be kept confidential is not repugnant. 

By her own very admission, in her filed court papers, Stormy Daniels was offered $130,000 for her silence and she accepted it. The letters of a contract must be respected and so should hers, otherwise what use are contracts anyway. Whatever right to speak she would have otherwise had arising from her encounter with the president was foreclosed when she mortgaged it for the $130,000 which she collected in bargain. Having accepted a tangible consideration for her silence, she cannot be allowed to now probate and reprobate from the same bargain. She accepted $130,000 hush payment as a trade for her silence and she cannot be allowed to doubly gain from her own sexual adventure. 

Stormy Daniels is an adult film performer, a sex worker, an escort, a glorified prostitute, who trades sexual favors for something including sometimes for a fee. In this instant, she was adequately compensated for her services and gagged against talking about it. The gag must not be unwound nor removed because to so do will be discouraging people from reaching agreements and respecting contractual terms and obligations. The president may have had his moral failings; but that irrespective, Stormy Daniels must not be allowed to unduly gain from the situation, having already pawned her right to talk about it and to forever remain silent. ICHEOKU says it is unfortunate that prostitutes, hookers, escorts and sex workers are not respectable people and they do not either honor nor candor have; otherwise Stormy Daniels would have known and needs not be reminded of her obligation of silence in this matter. What a dishonorable slot. Pitifully sad.