Of the Five W's routinely taught in Journalism 101 -- Who, What, Where, When and Why -- the most important is the last: Why.
The president's lawyer has admitted he paid a strip-tease dancer $130,000 to keep silent about an affair she allegedly had with the president. But the lawyer insisted the money was his, out of his own account, and he merely "facilitated the transfer" of the money to the dancer -- Stormy Daniels is her professional name.
It's still hush money, but the lawyer said it did not come from election campaign funds.
As if that makes it okay.
And whether the cash came directly from the lawyer, who happens to be a close friend of the president as well as his attorney, or was rerouted by the lawyer to the stripper from some other source, that may not be relevant.
Then again, maybe it is relevant. It's still hush money, and several questions remain: Was there another source, and if there was, who was it? More important, why pay the hush money at all?
If there was no sexual impropriety, why buy her silence?
Whether paying someone to keep quiet about some extra-marital affair is legal or not is a question for lawyers to debate. And the issue isn't really about whether this president has been fooling around with other women. Many others have, and while that may be true and the new guy's past behavior explains this latest expose, it does not excuse it.
Why pay someone to keep quiet about something that didn't happen?
No comments:
Post a Comment