How do you find the assertions in a signed legal document “false” in a fact-check? This is the task of the media vis-à-vis Stormy Daniel’s letter.

Stormy Daniels wrote a letter in which she confirmed in writing that she did not have an affair with former President Donald Trump in 2018.  This is quite an embarrassing little detail considering that Trump is currently being prosecuted for so-called “hush money” payments to Daniels, allegedly $130,000, which he supposedly didn’t account for properly in his business filings.  

So now the media comes out with their fact checks. “Missing context,” says the AP.  They’re very eager to show that although Daniels stated this in writing, she really didn’t mean it, she later recanted– she was confused!  Supposedly because Daniels signed an NDA, she was under the impression that she had to sign this letter.  According to Reuters, Stormy said she was “coerced” into writing the letter.  Really?  How was she coerced–what happened exactly?  But we have no details, instead we’re just supposed to regard Stormy as though she has no agency, as though she’s not an adult who is cognizant of legal documents which she signs.  

An NDA wouldn’t require one to make any affirmative statements which are untrue.  It would just require you not to disclose certain details, hence “non-disclosure.”  

Does Stormy’s letter of denial mean that she didn’t have an affair with Trump?  Not necessarily, but it’s kind of irrelevant, whether two consenting adults had sex, and Stormy herself has affirmed that it was consensual. So really, who cares?  The only takeaway is that it puts Stormy and the media in quite a pickle: Was she lying when she wrote the letter or is she lying now?  Either way, it tends to make her not the best pawn with which to attack Trump. 

Here’s how the AP covered their little fact check: 

“Missing context. The signed statement with the denial was publicly released on Jan. 30, 2018.  Not long after, Daniels recanted the statement and said that an affair had occurred. She said her denials were due to a non-disclosure agreement and that she signed the statement because parties involved “made it sound like I had no choice.”

So it’s not true to say Daniels denied the affair because she said it in 2018, before she did a 180 and stated that it did occur.  Maybe some Democrat operatives got to her and she found it more profitable to say they did in fact have an affair, the hush money she purportedly received was not equal to what the Democrats might have to offer her in terms of support, publicity, etc.  

At any rate, I assume that Daniels did have an affair with Trump, but it’s not like she was harmed in the process.  The fact that she denied it and got paid to do so, then reversed herself, tends to diminish her moral authority.  She accepted money to say one thing, which she now claims was a lie; and then reversed that when the benefits seemed to be in maintaining the affair did happen.  That’s called hypocrisy.  The only criticism I have for Trump here is his taste in women, at least for his side piece because Melania is beautiful and we love Melania. 

Follow Michael Machera Blog on Facebook and Twitter

Sign up to be informed of new posts:

Comment below: