Donald Trump has spent most of his adult life as a tabloid target.
“Best Sex I’ve Ever Had,” screamed a 1990 New York Post headline, quoting not-yet-second-wife Marla Maples. That headline came amid reports of divorce talks from first wife Ivana: “Billion Dollar Blowup” (People Magazine). “Ivana Better Deal” (New York Daily News) and “Marry Me Marla” (The Daily News).
And then, when Ivana supported Trump’s campaign for president, the headlines came full circle: “The Best Ex I’ve Ever Had.”
So this week’s headline in celebrity gossip magazine In Touch Weekly – “My Affair With Donald” – is neither surprising nor groundbreaking. It recounts a six-year-old, previously unpublished interview with an adult film actress who said she had an affair with Trump in 2005, shortly after his third wife, now first lady Melania Trump, gave birth to his youngest son.
Except, Trump is now President Trump. And the Wall Street Journal reports that his lawyer paid $130,000 just before the 2016 election in order to buy the silence of the porn star, Stormy Daniels.
On Thursday, the Journal reported that the payment came through a Delaware limited liability corporation, using pseudonyms to further obscure the transaction.
Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, has denied allegations of an affair or a payoff. “These rumours have circulated time and again since 2011,” he said. “President Trump once again vehemently denies any such occurrence, as has Ms Daniels.”
He produced a letter from Daniels last week in which she called the reports absolutely false.“My involvement with Donald Trump was limited to a few public appearances and nothing more,” she wrote in the letter provided by Cohen – an assertion contradicted by her interview with In Touch, which was purportedly supported by friends she confided in at the time. The magazine also said she passed a polygraph test.
The White House has mostly declined to engage on the story at all. “This allegation was asked and answered during the campaign,” White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah told reporters aboard Air Force One.
If so, it wasn’t answered publicly. Stories by Slate magazine, In Touch and Good Morning America didn’t materialise until the Wall Street Journal report gave the story legitimacy last week.
Trump’s exploits seem to be baked into his poll numbers. The Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump bragged – or, by his account, joked – about sexually assaulting women failed to derail his candidacy in 2016.
Brendan Nyhan, a Dartmouth University professor who has studied why some political scandals explode and others fizzle, says there’s a number of reasons why the Daniels story hasn’t been bigger news.
First, a “cluttered news environment” – including Trump’s comments on immigrants, a pending government shutdown and Trump’s own medical report – has crowded out the Daniels story, he said.
“The Daniels allegation is also not especially important to Democrats relative to concerns they have about the Russia investigation so no one is pushing the story hard,” Mr Nyhan said. “As a result, it’s getting less attention from both the press and the public who, in part, take cues from political elites about which topics are noteworthy.”
But there’s also this: The behaviour Daniels describes, beginning with meeting Trump in his hotel room at a celebrity golf tournament in 2005, appeared to be entirely consensual.
Even amid all the increased attention to sexual assault and sexual harassment in the wake of allegations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein and scores of other entertainers, executives, actors and politicians, the latest story about Trump doesn’t fit the pattern.
That differentiates it from President Clinton’s relationship with 22-year-old intern Monica Lewinsky in 1996 – a story that exploded into the mainstream news cycle 20 years ago this week.
This article first appeared in our sister title, USA Today
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel