The actual lawsuit itself really doesn't deserve much public discussion.
- The claim that the contract (the NDA) is void is highly dubious.
- Far more credible is the claim that the contract is, by dint of one or more facts of Trump's (his attorney's) behavior subsequent to the contract's having been signed and treated as though it was valid, voidable, entirely or in part.
As goes the matter of Trump philandering, well that's not a criminal matter and, frankly, it's really a matter to be addressed between him, Daniels and Mrs. Trump. What remains to be seen is how Melania Trump responds to what now cannot credibly be denied -- that Donald did indeed, while she was caring for their newborn son, have some sort of sexual congress with at least one woman.
It seems to me, at least re: the suit's germanity as a matter of public conversation, the lawsuit is little other than a vehicle for extending Daniels' "fifteen minutes of fame." That is what it is. I won't chide Daniels for enjoying the spotlight. I will, however, accord to Daniels my derision for actively seeking the spotlight in the self aggrandizing way she has. Her taking that tack belies the fact that, at heart, she is nothing other than a crassly plebeian "social climber."
More important, as far as I'm concerned, is the criminal question her lawsuit raises: Was the hush money paid to prevent politically deleterious information from coming to light in advance of the 2016. That is well worth covering by any organization that considers itself a legitimate news outlet. It is because if the payout was made with that as part or all of its intent, doing so was illegal because the manner in which the payment was made, and that it was made, would have violated federal election laws. The timing of Trump and Daniel's intimacy and the intervening decade before the contract was effected makes it very hard to think that keeping secret the affair -- something that some, likely many, people would have considered material information about Trump -- was not part or all of the intent for the contract and the manner in which it was executed.
