The OP is about Lisa Bloom soliciting money for the Trump accusers. Money she would receive a healthy commission from. A so-called lawyer acting as an entertainment performer agent. Besides fattening her purse Bloom wants to increase her profile as a paymaster for anti Republican accusers.

The juicier the story the more money for the accuser and their so-called lawyer. There is no legal jeopardy in lying to the media nor for telling a different story under oath than to the media so follow the money, Lisa Bloom did.

In addition to increasing the revenue producing potential of the stories the accusers lengthen their time in the spotlight by portraying themselves as victims beset by death threats. Unproven accusations coupled with anonymous death threats is like cat nip to a media obsessed with destroying Trump.

__________________
If Democrats were confident their nominee actually received more than 80 million votes they wouldn't have more troops occupying Washington, DC than Lincoln had defending the city during the Civil War. Not Joe Biden, Kim Jung Biden.

Turns out its not true.

starts at beginning of video. first few minutes discredit this

__________________

Lisa Bloom would receive nothing from the donations for the women that are earmarked for costs related to protecting the safety of the women. No donations are going into Lisa Blooms pocket.

Lisa Bloom, according to the story, would only receive compensation if any of the women sell their story to a publication. This relates to the women earning money based upon the story they have to sell (not from donations) and in those cases Lisa Bloom would receive a percentage because she's been representing the women on a pro bono basis.

We've seen threats across the spectrum coming from not just Trump supporters but more recently from Roy Moore supporters. These threats are very real and Roy Moore's accusers have been unable to go to work because of the threats they've received.

It's not just naïve for Trump and Moore supporters to live in denial of the threats made against the accusers, it's simply dishonest. We have Trump supporters that are actually willing to kill people as was demonstrated in Charlottesville just a couple of month ago. Trump supporters have been attacking Muslims just because they hate Muslims.

Alt-Right extremists, all of which are basically Trump supporters, represent the primary threat of terrorism in the United States today according to law enforcement groups and to think that these "Alt-Right" Trump supporters aren't threatening Trump's accusers is simply being dishonest.

__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.

As usual, the comment attempts to replace facts with partisan resistance rhetoric.

From the Hill article that broke the story.

Emphasis added.

Exclusive: Prominent lawyer sought donor cash for two Trump accusers | TheHill

There is no earmarking of any kind for the monies obtained for the accusers after Bloom peddled there stories. Neither is their any evidence of Trump supporters threatening the accusers.

As far as the linkage to Charlottesville, that is just nonsense.

__________________
If Democrats were confident their nominee actually received more than 80 million votes they wouldn't have more troops occupying Washington, DC than Lincoln had defending the city during the Civil War. Not Joe Biden, Kim Jung Biden.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...orward-1068352
"This all happened 13 months ago," Bloom tells THR. "It's an effort to undermine the Trump accusers now that they are gaining momentum."...

Bloom said her goal in securing money was not to pressure the women to come forward, but rather to help them relocate or arrange security if they felt unsafe during the waning days of a vitriolic election."...

That woman who chose not to come forward decided to tell her story to The Hill after learning that Bloom was representing embattled producer Harvey Weinstein (an attorney-client relationship that ended very publicly after rape allegations surfaced). The woman says she supported Trump in 2016 and doesn't resent him because he stopped his advances toward her when she asked him to, according to The Hill. She also says that she's friends with many people close to the president, but no one associated with the White House or Trump forced her to come forward...
...The website separately published lengthy excerpts from Bloom's statements, along with those of her client, Jill Harth, who says she was sexually assaulted by Trump in the '90s.

Bloom turned to Twitter to criticize the story and the reporter, John Solomon, whom she described as being known for " 'weaponizing' stories about progressives like me to feed to Fox News." (Solomon didn't reply to a request for comment.)

"Even this spurious article, written with the intention of casting doubt on the accusers, includes this important fact: that the victims who came forward were telling the truth," writes Bloom.

As other outlets like Fox News, "Page Six" and The Daily Caller have picked up the story, the claim that seems to be getting the most attention is the one that involves donors allegedly offering six-figure payments to women willing to tell their stories. Both of the women who were quoted, though, stress that they were never asked to make statements they didn't believe were true.

Bloom says donors approached her firm after a Jane Doe Trump accuser canceled a November 2016 press conference at the last minute because she'd been receiving death threats.

"Multiple donors then contacted me out of the blue with offers to ensure the safety of women who might still come forward," Bloom writes in her statement. "As an attorney I was obligated to relay those offers of funds for relocation to a safer community and round the clock security, and I was happy to do it."

(continued)

__________________

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...orward-1068352 (continued from above)


The Hill also mentioned that the attorney told the unnamed woman she could get upward of $15,000, less Bloom's one-third fee, for giving her first interview to a show like Dr. Phil or Inside Edition. Bloom, in her Twitter statement, explained that when she takes on cases for free, or at a reduced fee, she includes in the contract that the firm will take one-third of any payment the client receives as a media fee. Most people won't be paid for interviews, she says, but some shows will pay to license photos or offer an appearance fee.

Following the explosion of sexual harassment and assault allegations within Hollywood and Congress, several of Trump's accusers have renewed their efforts to have their claims investigated. Bloom tells The Hollywood Reporter the timing of The Hill's report is no coincidence.

"This all happened 13 months ago," she says. "It’s an effort to undermine the Trump accusers now that they are gaining momentum."

__________________

2017 has been a good year for addressing sexual harassment and assault. Americans are finally starting to listen to the accusers stories to determine if the story is creditable or if it's false. Just because the accused denies an allegation it does not make the allegation false. We've also started to understand that the criteria for determining if sexual harassment or assault occurred is not based upon the criteria for a criminal conviction. When it comes to those in the public spotlight all that's required is the creditability of the accuser. If the accuser's story is creditable then it's enough to assume that they're telling the truth and that the harassment or assault occurred.

We're also beginning to understand that a "he said-she said" situation does not exist if multiple women come forward to accuse a someone like Donald Trump or Roy Moore. As the number of women increase the probability of the sexual harassment or assault increases exponentially.

Additionally there's a significant difference between a woman coming forward to make an initial statement of sexual harassment or assault and if a woman comes forward to confirm a statement made by the accused.

In the case of Donald Trump the women that have come forward are merely providing evidence that when Trump claimed that he has committed sexual assault that he was telling the truth because they were the victims of Trump's sexual assaults.

Trump made the claim he committed sexual assault and got away with it because he was a celebrity.

The women are witnesses that Trump's claim was true because Trump did sexually assault them and,, up until the time they came forward, Trump did get away with it because he was a celebrity.

That Trump would later try to dismiss his statements as being "locker room" talk was clearly a lie once the victims of his sexual assault came forward to confirm that his prior statement was the truth. And it wasn't just one woman. It's been over a dozen women that have confirmed that Donald Trump did assault them and got away with it for years because of his wealth and celebrity status.

If you go into court and you have a dozen witnesses to confirm a statement you made you have a substantial case for what you said is true. Basically that's what Donald Trump has to support the Hollywood Access statements because he has over a dozen witnesses willing to state under oath that his statement on that tape is true. Trump doesn't have any witnesses that can testify that his statement on the Hollywood Access tape is false.

The same is true of the statements he made with Howard Stern. He claimed he would walk into the dressing room unannounced to see young Miss Teen USA contestants in the nude under the false pretext of performing an inspection. Numerous former Miss Teen USA have confirmed that was true. These young girls had no one to file a compliant with because Donald Trump owned the contest. Basically, because of their age, Donald Trump was a pedophile like Roy Moore and the victims of his actions have verified that what he told Howard Stern was 100% accurate.

It's strange because it seems that the one time Trump seemed to tell the truth was when he was bragging about being a sexual predator. Being a sexual predator was something he took great pride in obviously believing it made him "more manly" in the opinion of others. A very narcissistic trait.

__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.