Why is Michael Avenatti Doing All This?

[John_Mace]

@septimus

Although the Michael A. vs Michael C. duel is the top spectacle today, I’m interested in the subthread question: Is (almost) everyone motivated primarily by money?

I was surprised to learn some Dopers think the answer is obviously Yes.

Sure, many businessmen are strongly motivated by money, and so are some celebrities, e.g. Paris Hilton, famous for being rich. But for a huge portion of humanity, wealth-seeking is very low priority once they have enough; indeed for many it’s low priority even if they don’t have enough. Although doctors are well-paid, I think many become doctors to have a proud benevolent career. This applies to some lawyers as well. I feel sad for people that don’t understand this.

I don’t know exactly what motivates Michael Avenatti. Fame? Public service? Fun? But he’s already extremely wealthy; I pity people who assume his primary goal must be further financial gain, whether immediate or long-term.
I’m not suggesting Avenatti will turn any income from Trump’s downfall over to charity, but that doesn’t mean money is his main motivation.

I don’t think (almost) everyone is primarily motivated by money.

But I think Avenatti is in this case. We will, of course, never know and it’s not something any one of us can prove. But the idea that someone is probably not motivated by money because he’s already rich is simply not true. Especially when that someone is a celebrity lawyer. I would not not extrapolate from “the average Joe does X” to “Avenatti does X”. He’s not an average Joe.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@elucidator

OK, let’s say his intentions are admirable, in the sense of patriotic, civic-minded. Then he should have found another route to have them be public. Absitively, posolutely, this shit should be dragged out into the sunlight, but he was not the right person to do it. Hard to imagine anyone wronger.

Also, I very much doubt he has anything Mueller doesn’t already have. If he did, well, maybe that might be different. But he could still have copied the documents and dropped a copy to a news org. Wait a few days, nothing happens, drop another set to a different org. Hell, maybe send the first set to Fox, just for shits and giggles…

These days, being honorably subtle, polite and correct is the path of the loser.

[Lemur866]

@John_Mace

I don’t think (almost) everyone is primarily motivated by money.

But I think Avenatti is in this case. We will, of course, never know and it’s not something any one of us can prove. But the idea that someone is probably not motivated by money because he’s already rich is simply not true. Especially when that someone is a celebrity lawyer. I would not not extrapolate from “the average Joe does X” to “Avenatti does X”. He’s not an average Joe.

Sure, but it is very easy to understand his behavior, even if one were to believe he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about appearing on television all day every day. If you’re a high profile lawyer who wants more high profile cases, making your cases high profile is obviously very smart. Even if you don’t care about being famous in and of itself, it’s easy to see that being a famous lawyer helps you get more clients which helps you get more money. There’s a direct relationship between: High profile celebrity laywer–>appears on TV all the time–>Gets more clients that way–>makes even more money.

If the question instead is “How is he benefiting his client by appearing on TV all day every day”, the answer is a little more indirect. But it seems pretty likely that Stormy Daniels can make a lot more than $130,000 from her story.

Avenatti surely isn’t billing Daniels at $300 an hour for his work, cash up front. That doesn’t mean this is some pro bono case that he’s doing to fulfill his legal aid obligation.

[Chimera]

Well, and for those who don’t think he’s the right guy or that his tactics are appropriate;

Just how do you propose that someone fight the man with the biggest bully pulpit on the planet? With meekness and politeness? :dubious:

[Red_Wiggler]

He’s got nothing to lose by getting down in the mud with the Don. He represents a porn star and wealth and notoriety are on the table for who can get dirtiest. Man, that came out like I’m being critical of Avenatti. What I mean is, who better to rassle with Trump in Trump’s favorite arena?

[asahi]

I’ve wondered the same thing. This is becoming the Michael Avenatti show, and it’s as if he’s auditioning for a spot on Mueller’s all-star team.

[Moriarty]

@pdhenry

Close. He told Rachel Maddow last night that his fee from Stormy Daniels was “de minimus.” He also mentioned a crowdfunding site that’s out there but he was insistent that there’s not some deep pocket in the shadows funding all of his time.

(Having been briefly under the mercy of a $200/hour lawyer on retainer I can appreciate how quickly the billable hours add up.)

I bet he took a flat fee for some token amount as part of signing a retainer agreement. Crowdfunding can just go to expenses.

Although that does raise an intriguing question: regardless of his fee, is this lawsuit being billed for all of the travel he is doing to the television studios? I wonder if those count as expenses along the lines of hiring an investigator to interview potential witnesses?

@Lemur866

…even if one were to believe he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about appearing on television all day every day…

Now that is plainly not true (not that you said it was). This guy clearly loves litigating this case in the court of public opinion.

Since it’s agitating his opponent into dumb, contradictory statements, I’m sure he feels justified to talk to news people. But I’m also sure he’s lovvving it.

@John Mace

I don’t think (almost) everyone is primarily motivated by money.

How about “tail”? Is Avennatti married? Judging from some Facebook comments, he has lots and lots of female admirers. If he is inclined, I’m sure this is doing his social life a solid.

[John_Mace]

@Lemur866

Sure, but it is very easy to understand his behavior, even if one were to believe he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about appearing on television all day every day. If you’re a high profile lawyer who wants more high profile cases, making your cases high profile is obviously very smart. Even if you don’t care about being famous in and of itself, it’s easy to see that being a famous lawyer helps you get more clients which helps you get more money. There’s a direct relationship between: High profile celebrity laywer–>appears on TV all the time–>Gets more clients that way–>makes even more money.

If the question instead is “How is he benefiting his client by appearing on TV all day every day”, the answer is a little more indirect. But it seems pretty likely that Stormy Daniels can make a lot more than $130,000 from her story.

Avenatti surely isn’t billing Daniels at $300 an hour for his work, cash up front. That doesn’t mean this is some pro bono case that he’s doing to fulfill his legal aid obligation.

Yep. Agree 100%.

[DigitalC]

Avenatti would be happily paying 300 and hour to do what he is doing.

[JohnT]

@elucidator

This is high drama on the civic stage, its kinda silly, and is also grimly important. This news should be out, it is important. Mr Avenatti revealing it almost rebuts itself, he already has a public presence as an enemy of Trump. It weakens credibility. To stretch for an analogy, if Jane Fonda had the Pentagon Papers, and personally revealed them, I would question her judgement. Again.

Its important that the truth be told, its also important that it be told effectively. We don’t seem to have a Walter Cronkite, these days. (Look him up, puppy Dopers. And get off my LAN…)

We don’t need a Walter Cronkite, Luci, and the credibility issue is zero when it comes to the facts.

What you should be flailing over is that this guy found more damaging information tying Trump to corruption, even Russian corruption, in 4, 5 months than the House (R) Intel Committee did in over a year.

[JohnT]

A lot of what is being asked is answered on his Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti?s=09

To the question of “why is he doing this” he addressed that four days ago:

“Listen up: Not all cases are the same nor is the winning strategy. Here, the constant media/PR pressure has forced Trump, Cohen, et al. to make a series of huge errors and to make damaging admissions helpful to our case. This was not by accident. And we’re not changing. #basta”

Here is how he is getting paid:

Michael Avenatti

[running_coach]

@JohnT

We don’t need a Walter Cronkite, Luci, and the credibility issue is zero when it comes to the facts.

What you should be flailing over is that this guy found more damaging information tying Trump to corruption, even Russian corruption, in 4, 5 months than the House (R) Intel Committee did in over a year.

Easy to do when the Committee was actively avoiding finding anything.

[John_Mace]

@JohnT

A lot of what is being asked is answered on his Twitter feed:

x.com

To the question of “why is he doing this” he addressed that four days ago:

“Listen up: Not all cases are the same nor is the winning strategy. Here, the constant media/PR pressure has forced Trump, Cohen, et al. to make a series of huge errors and to make damaging admissions helpful to our case. This was not by accident. And we’re not changing. #basta”

Here is how he is getting paid:

x.com

I’m not seeing that as being incessant with anything I’ve said, or with anything anyone here has said here either. He’s just talking about what his tactics have been, not about what his motivation is.

[JohnT]

Fame, money, power, a possible sense of justice, and likely a guy with a bit of an anger issue who has learned how to channel it effectively and now finds himself on the biggest case of his life and is looking to use it to establish himself as a known brand in the American consumer market. Over the course of his life, the reputational impact of this case will easily result in nine figures of income, and maybe 10 - a billion dollars.

What other motivation does he need?

[BobLibDem]

I think the primary motivation is patriotism. He can see that this administration is a direct threat to democracy and any little thing he can do to bring it to a disgraceful end is a noble act of patriotism.

[Kearsen]

@BobLibDem

I think the primary motivation is patriotism. He can see that this administration is a direct threat to democracy and any little thing he can do to bring it to a disgraceful end is a noble act of patriotism.

Bahahaha!!

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

Who is paying Michael Avenatti?

[simster]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Who is paying Michael Avenatti?

ahh - so just asking questions - big fucking deal.

[Max_Torque]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Who is paying Michael Avenatti?

Wow, you’re behind the times. Avenatti has answered this before about a dozen times, and put out a statement yesterday as well: his fees are paid by Stormy Daniels herself and by a crowdfunding page on crowdjustice.com. Specifically, https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stormy/ .

In case anyone missed that, it’s https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stormy/ .

So if anyone wants to donate, they can go to https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stormy/ .

Now, don’t you wish you didn’t bring up https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stormy/ ?

Because now everybody knows about https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stormy/ .

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@JohnT

Over the course of his life, the reputational impact of this case will easily result in nine figures of income, and maybe 10 - a billion dollars.

Maybe you think he’s getting a book deal or something, but lawyers don’t make billions being lawyers no matter how famous they are.

@Merneith

So tonight while making dinner, I see Avenatti talking to someone on msnbc ( forget her name, she’s on all the time, around dinner). And she asks Avenatti - why is he doing this with Cohen’s payment? how is all this helping his case?

Avenatti replied that this helps because (paraphrasing here) a) it goes to his opponent’s honesty & trustworthiness and b) it goes to Daniels’ argument that she thought she had an agreement with Donald Trump but Donald didn’t sign it, or (supposedly) pay for it, or (depending on who’s talking on what day) even know anything about it.

Avenatti’s revelations go to the question of who, precisely, paid Daniels, and why, and how, and was Donald involved in any this. That’s all relevant to Daniel’s argument that the supposed NDA agreement with Donald is invalid.

Annoying Donald is its own reward, of course, but there is a legal tactic behind all this.

To follow up on this, Avenatti has gotten Trump to claim he had no knowledge of the payment. If Donald didn’t have any knowledge of the payment, he doesn’t have the right to enforce the NDA because he didn’t pay consideration for the agreement. At common law, a third-party beneficiary has no standing to enforce a contract.

Cohen would have standing, of course, but Cohen now has his own world of problems resulting from Avenatti’s investigation, and is unlikely to be getting involved by the time the case is tried.