Posted on 05/11/2018 7:37:35 AM PDT by gattaca
Michael Avenatti on Thursday afternoon issued a statement in response to an opinion piece by a former adviser for President Bill Clinton questioning who was paying him to represent Stormy Daniels,
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Which means bupkis - who is dumping money into the crowdjustice page?
Get Avenatti’s bank records (smirk).
This is the legal loophole like the millions of dollars Obama received from anonymous pre-paid Visa and MC gift cards without scrutiny.
Sure, the DNC did not write the check. No progressive PAC wrote a check. Soros’ fingerprints can’t be linked.
However if you expect me to believe that a crowd sourced legal defense fund can accumulate $438,000 organically for a porn actress working the gentleman’s club circuit.... um... yeah.... no.
The left has made it a science to hide their funding. From BLM, to ANTIFA, Occupy Wall Street etc. we’re all led to believe it’s spontaneous grass roots happenings and we all know it’s not.
This is no different but of course with the anonymity of the web and crowd source funding we can’t prove it and they know it.
I know the left is deranged but I refuse to believe that 44,000 people knew Stormy Daniels had a crowd sourced legal defense page set up somewhere and donated $10 each which is what he’s claimed.
The fact that he’s so outraged over this, so vitriolic and defensive means my, or something close to it, theory is correct.
Laundered political cash.
The online money laundering service.
Reminds me of “Breaking Bad” where one of the schemes to explain Walt’s vast wealth (from drug dealing) was a web site that accepted anonymous donations to help fund his cancer treatments. BOOM! Millions of dollars donated almost overnight!
Lol, did that former Bill Clinton adviser ask on ‘behalf of a friend’?
Wrong headline YAHOO. The headline should read, “Michael Avenetti again refuses to be honest about his funding”. We know this because his one and only client, Spermy Daniels already blurted out that she is not paying him.
Maybe they called Saul Goodman to handle
“...I refuse to believe that 44,000 people knew Stormy Daniels had a crowd sourced legal defense page set up somewhere and donated $10 each which is what he’s claimed.”
Seriously? It wouldn’t surprise me one bit to find that 3 million people had donated $5. It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that 10 MM people had contributed $1 or $2. Or that 1000 people had contributed $1K. Or all of those. This cause isn’t going to be short of money, of that you can be sure.
Other than food, nothing sold is what it is. People do not buy electric drills to own the drill. They buy electric drills to place holes where & when they want them. They buy holes.
People contributing to the Stormy Daniels fund aren’t contributing to the SD fund; they are contributing to the “get Trump” fund. Now I don’t own nor watch TV, but Avenatti has been on CNN over 65 times. Every time Avenatti says he’s being funded from a XYZ fund, at least 10,000 people who never heard of it before will seek that out and at least 500 of them will throw a few bucks at it.
Stormy Daniels tweeted that she’s not paying for anything.
" In Avenatti’s early days, he worked at The Research Group, a political opposition research and media firm run by Democratic political operative Rahm Emanuel. "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3654397/posts?page=9#9
I think California doj already has them.
Money is being funneled through an account in her name.
Wait until she sees the tax bill for the donations. I can’t see how she can claim this as gifts. Otherwise, I’ll ask my employer to stop paying me and fund a Go Fund Me account instead so I can say my income is from donations.
Good point. I would imagine taxes would have to be paid? I am ignorant of these things...
....good.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.