Officials in Texas are investigating the nondisclosure agreement signed by adult-film actress Stormy Daniels after it was revealed that the notary did not sign or date the document, the Dallas Morning News reported Monday. Stormy Daniels is getting multiple offers of $1 million to break her silence (and contract) on her long-term tryst with Donald Trump.
Trump's attorney said that he paid Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet about the affair she had with the president.
Daniels - real name Stephanie Clifford - is suing to get out of the agreement.
Earlier this year, for example, a different Trump attorney sent threatening letters to the publisher and author of Michael Wolff's book "Fire and Fury", but the publisher went ahead with the book's release.
Clifford's lawyer, Michael Avenatti, argues that his client's original agreement with Trump and Cohen is invalid-along with a requirement stipulating that any ensuing disputes be handled in private arbitration-and that Clifford should be allowed to speak publicly about the alleged affair.
The reason Cohen is twisting himself into such absurd logical knots is because if he acted to buy Daniels' silence and boost his client's shot at winning the White House, the payment is nearly certainly an unlawful, unreported campaign contribution.
Donald Trump's lawyer said last month he paid Ms Clifford $US130,000 out of his own pocket. The letter from Avenatti says a condition of Clifford's offer is Trump and his attorney will not take legal action to stop the interview from airing.
As Stormy Daniels plied her trade at one or more Florida strip clubs over the weekend, she continued her assault on the American media - and, some might say - its mores.
Daniels, for her part, did not comment on any of the potential legal issues surrounding the airing of the show, nor did she comment on anything she and Cooper had discussed. The statement is an admission that the nondisclosure agreement exists and that it directly involves Trump.
"It would be extremely unusual [for the Department of Justice to prosecute] since they lost a similar case against a presidential candidate", said Jan Witold Baran, a campaign finance lawyer in Washington.
So, at least from a legal point of view, Daniels can't avoid her obligations under the NDA simply by returning the money she has already received in return for her promise of silence.