 "A combination photo shows Adult film actress Stephanie Clifford, also known as Stormy Daniels speaking in New York City, and then US President Donald Trump speaking in Washington, Michigan, US on April 16, 2018 and April 28, 2018 respectively. File Image/Reuters")
Former United States President Donald Trump finds himself once again in the spotlight over claims of attempting to silence adult film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the upcoming 2024 presidential election.
A report has surfaced from MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, alleging that Trump’s legal team recently tried to strike a deal with Daniels, offering to lower the amount she owed Trump in a defamation lawsuit if she agreed to stay quiet about their past and refrain from making any “defamatory or disparaging statements.”
This follows a similar hush money scandal from 2016, which led to Trump’s conviction earlier this year.
Maddow’s investigation into the matter revealed calls, emails, and documents that point to another attempt by Trump to ensure Daniels’ silence. Maddow stated during her Wednesday evening broadcast, “Twenty days before this election, we can report that he is once again trying to pay Stormy Daniels to be quiet.”
In 2016, Trump’s then-attorney Michael Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 to prevent her from going public with claims of an affair that allegedly took place in 2006. This hush money was at the centre of Trump’s trial in New York earlier this year, where he faced 34 felony counts for falsifying business records.
Trump was found guilty in May 2024, making him the first US president convicted of a felony. Now, with his sentencing scheduled for November 26, just weeks after the upcoming election, new reports suggest Trump’s legal team has once again reached out to Daniels in a last-ditch effort to avoid further media attention.
Was the new offer another hush money deal?
The latest attempt, according to Maddow, involved a letter from Trump’s lawyers in July 2024. They proposed a settlement of $620,000 in relation to the defamation case Daniels lost to Trump in 2018. Trump’s team, however, attached conditions to the offer.
Daniels was required to sign an agreement that she would not make any public or private statements about her past interactions with Trump or make any remarks that could be seen as defamatory or disparaging.
The letter read: “We disagree that a payment of $620,000 would be in full satisfaction of the three judgments. However, we can agree to settle these matters for $620,000, provided that your client agrees in writing to make no public or private statements related to any alleged past interactions with President Trump, or defamatory or disparaging statements about him, his businesses, and/or his suitability as a candidate for President.”
Maddow explained that Trump’s legal team had found a way to potentially “launder the new hush money payment” by disguising it as a legal judgment. This way, they could reduce Daniels’ debt by over $30,000 if she agreed to stay silent.
An audio recording of a call between Daniels and her lawyer reveals her attorney saying, “They want to cut some sort of deal where they silence you.”
Follow Firstpost’s coverage of the 2024 US presidential electionDaniels, however, turned down the offer. Instead, she settled the case for $627,500 without agreeing to any non-disclosure terms. Maddow stated how Trump’s campaign tried to mask the agreement as a financial settlement while ultimately seeking to muzzle Daniels.
What are the legal implications of this development?
Although Trump’s attempt to settle the case does not appear illegal on its own, the timing and nature of the offer raise ethical questions. Trump’s previous conviction stemmed from how he concealed the 2016 hush money payments by falsifying business records.
While this new offer has not yet been the subject of a formal investigation, experts are questioning whether Trump’s actions will factor into his sentencing for the previous case.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, which led the prosecution in Trump’s earlier trial, has declined to comment on whether this recent attempt to silence Daniels will have legal ramifications.
However, legal analysts have pointed out that Trump’s latest behaviour may be considered by Judge Juan Merchan when he sentences Trump for his 34 felony counts. Under New York law, the judge could take into account Trump’s lack of remorse, particularly if this new information is included in a presentencing report.
If convicted of all counts, Trump could face up to four years in prison for each charge, although any sentence would likely run concurrently. While Trump’s legal troubles continue to mount, his campaign appears to have taken no steps to mitigate the damage.
How has Trump’s team responded?
In response to the Maddow report, Trump’s campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung claimed that the documents Maddow obtained were part of an illegal foreign hacking attack. Cheung alleged, without evidence, that “purported documents were attained as part of an illegal foreign hacking attack against President Trump and his team.”
He further claimed, “We are working with authorities to determine the legal repercussions for those likely committing federal offenses by posting and utilising stolen material by terror regime adversaries.”
Watch:
These claims of foreign interference echo previous allegations of hacking involving Iranian nationals earlier in Trump’s campaign. In September 2024, US authorities charged three members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps with hacking Trump’s campaign in an attempt to disrupt the election.
However, Maddow herself made it clear that the information was lawfully obtained from Daniels’ legal team and had nothing to do with foreign hackers.
What next?
As the 2024 election draws closer, this new revelation could hurt Trump’s chances among undecided voters.
Also Watch:
With his ongoing legal battles and efforts to silence Daniels once again in the public eye, Trump’s standing with swing voters may take another hit.
With inputs from agencies