Stormy Daniels Testimony Proves the Intent of the Trial

 

It is quite clear to me that the testimony by Stormy Daniels proves without a doubt that the current trial of Trump has nothing to do with a lasting conviction, and is only out to damage Trump. As Andrew McCarthy notes:

For nothing more than the purpose of humiliating the Democrats’ political nemesis and their opponent in the 2024 presidential election, Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg, has proffered Stormy Daniels’s sensational story of a sexual encounter with Donald Trump in the unprecedented, media-saturated first-ever trial against a former U.S. president.

Trump’s lawyers objected to the testimony, which — as I’ve previously contended, herehere and here — is not relevant to the business-records falsification charges in the case. In particular, Team Trump strenuously objected to graphic details of the sexual encounter that Daniels claims she had with Trump in 2006. As we’ve come to expect, Judge Juan Merchan overruled Trump’s counsel.

But then, quite remarkably, after allowing the jury to hear the salacious testimony — a minute-by-minute account of the alleged tryst — Merchan had the jury leave the courtroom and proceeded to dress down the prosecutors for doing what he allowed them to do.

Now, this shows that both the prosecutors and Merchan are out to damage Trump. There is no way to undo what the jury has heard. Merchan allowed the prosecutors to simply have negative testimony that has nothing to do with the case, solely to paint Trump in a bad light. I think the term is “unduly prejudicial,” but I am not a lawyer.

As he goes on to say:

The core defense objection was not that Daniels is incredible; it was that her testimony about a sexual encounter in 2006 is irrelevant to whether Trump falsified business records in 2017 detailing the repayment of a 2016 debt to Michael Cohen. (Emphasis in the original)

It is quite easy to see letting in testimony that is both irrelevant to the actual charges and is unduly prejudicial is simply a way to hurt Trump.

Bryon York has this to say:

Perhaps the weirdest, and by far the most unjust, thing about former President Donald Trump’s trial in New York is that we do not know precisely what crime Trump is charged with committing. We’re in the middle of the trial, with Trump facing a maximum of more than 100 years in prison, and we don’t even know what the charges are! It’s a surreal situation

How is it, in America, that someone is on trial without knowing the exact crime he is charged with committing? This whole case is built on layering crimes, one of which is simply not told to anyone. It is quite clear, again, there is nothing there.

I do think Trump will be found guilty because it is clear that is the intent of the judge. He wants that verdict and will allow anything that helps get there.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 22 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    • #1
  2. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    I wish the voters would punish them. 

    But, based on responses I have seen to the Florida documents trial, apparently, putting a trail date off because the Prosecution lied about its handling of evidence and admits it, proves the Judge is corrupt. 

    • #2
  3. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    I wish the voters would punish them.

    But, based on responses I have seen to the Florida documents trial, apparently, putting a trail date off because the Prosecution lied about its handling of evidence and admits it, proves the Judge is corrupt.

    There’s a reason that the first thing revolutionaries do is take over the media.

    That’s what they did here. That’s how they can successfully mind-control the populace into accepting so much injustice.

    I suppose the question is, short of another Revolution, how do we take back the media?

     

    • #3
  4. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    More on this from Victoria Taft:

    Prosecutors S**t the Bed With Stormy Daniels Testimony in Trump Trial; Judge Denies Mistrial

    Daniels sued the former president for defamation when he called her allegation that Trump sent a person to tell Daniels to shut up about her talk about Trump a “total con job.” When she gave a description of the man it looked an awful lot like her own husband. She lost the case and wound up being ordered to pay Trump more than $250,000 in legal fees. This was presented by the defense as a reason why Daniels had a motive to Get Trump.

    Trump has denied all trysts with Daniels.

    At one point Judge Juan Merchan told prosecutors that “The degree of detail you are going into here is just unnecessary.” He said he’d come back Thursday and decide whether he’ll give jurors an instruction to forget what they just heard.

    Good luck.

    . . .

    Maybe prosecutors wanted to detract from three witnesses who have testified now that Trump had nothing to do with sending checks to Daniels and another woman, a Playboy bunny. Maybe they forgot about their theory of the case that Trump stole the 2016 election. You remember the 2016 election, right? Or the part where Team Trump wrote them on the balance sheet as lawyer fees, because they were fees to the lawyer, Michael Cohen. 

    You remember the bookkeeping case, right? 

    Not for long you won’t because Stormy’s back on Thursday morning when court resumes.

    • #4
  5. Retail Lawyer Member
    Retail Lawyer
    @RetailLawyer

    I wish I was back in law school now.  I wonder how the professors would teach rules of evidence and civil procedure in light of this case.  I presume the professors would be against Trump, and of the “by any means necessary” interpretation of law, yet still have a duty to instruct in the law.

    Well, I don’t really wish I was in law school now.  I imagine it to be a terribly hostile environment for anyone not far left of center.

    • #5
  6. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    Anybody testifying that is not an expert in election law and accounting is superfluous and should be disallowed under rule of law.  But, Dems are outside of the rule of law and produce show trials.

    • #6
  7. Cosmik Phred Member
    Cosmik Phred
    @CosmikPhred

    Remember the Lewinsky business?

    We were told over and over:  “It’s only about sex.”

    Good times.  Good times.

    • #7
  8. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    More on this from Victoria Taft:

    Prosecutors S**t the Bed With Stormy Daniels Testimony in Trump Trial; Judge Denies Mistrial

    Daniels sued the former president for defamation when he called her allegation that Trump sent a person to tell Daniels to shut up about her talk about Trump a “total con job.” When she gave a description of the man it looked an awful lot like her own husband. She lost the case and wound up being ordered to pay Trump more than $250,000 in legal fees. This was presented by the defense as a reason why Daniels had a motive to Get Trump.

    Trump has denied all trysts with Daniels.

    At one point Judge Juan Merchan told prosecutors that “The degree of detail you are going into here is just unnecessary.” He said he’d come back Thursday and decide whether he’ll give jurors an instruction to forget what they just heard.

    Good luck.

    . . .

    Maybe prosecutors wanted to detract from three witnesses who have testified now that Trump had nothing to do with sending checks to Daniels and another woman, a Playboy bunny. Maybe they forgot about their theory of the case that Trump stole the 2016 election. You remember the 2016 election, right? Or the part where Team Trump wrote them on the balance sheet as lawyer fees, because they were fees to the lawyer, Michael Cohen.

    You remember the bookkeeping case, right?

    Not for long you won’t because Stormy’s back on Thursday morning when court resumes.

    This is just sickening.

    But I’ve been assured that if it is all OK by ethical conservatives. All Trumps fault.

    • #8
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Her “testimony” reminds me of the execrable E. Jean Carroll in that it seems to be her fantasy rendition of what she thought might happen, if it ever did.  Which it didn’t, but if it did…

    Also the OJ Simpson book “If I Did It.”

    • #9
  10. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    Where are the major professional organizations who issue press releases about Judges being criticized but are nowhere to be found when a criminally unethical judge like Merchan goes totally Third World? 
    The ABA?
    The New York State Bar Association? 
    ANY state bar association?

    The NY Judicial Ethics enforcement body, if indeed they have one?
    The state trial lawyer associations?

    The state criminal bar associations?

    The High Court of New York which has the legal and moral duty to defrock this lunatic before he does any more damage?

    I have been a practicing lawyer most of my life and I am ashamed and disgraced and sickened by what is happening in this “trial”.

     

    • #10
  11. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    And seeing how the story only includes two people who can possibly know if Slut Daniels is lying (most likely in my opinion) and since it’s a criminal trial, Trump can choose to testify and call her a liar or stay silent.

    If he stays silent, her testimony goes unrefuted.  It he testifies, then that opens up the possibility to drag him through the mud on every thing he has ever done and said in his life.  That’s not really correct legally, but it is what they obviously intend.  

    • #11
  12. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    Skyler (View Comment):
    If he stays silent, her testimony goes unrefuted.  It he testifies, then that opens up the possibility to drag him through the mud on every thing he has ever done and said in his life.  That’s not really correct legally, but it is what they obviously intend.  

    If I am Trump’s lawyer, my cross examination is like this:

    • Ms. Clifford, did you graduation from law school?
    • Ms. Clifford, are you member of the New York Bar?
    • Ms. Clifford, have you ever been employed by the Federal Election Commission?
    • Ms. Clifford, do you have a degree in accounting?
    • Ms. Clifford, do you claim to be a qualified expert in a case on election expense reporting?
    • No further questions.

    You remind the jury, what the case is about and that Stormy is just there to smear Trump.

    • #12
  13. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    If Trump wins the election, and I think he will, it will be thanks to Bragg and Juan “Mexican Judge” Merchan. In the primaries DeSantis was gaining on Trump, and Trump looked listless until Bragg indicted him. Would Trump have won the nomination without the indictment? Maybe. But DeSantis had the Mo on his side until Trump had to go to New York.

    Merchan has so obviously turned this trial into a sham that a lot of independents sympathize with him. The time constraints of attending trial have forced Trump to become a more disciplined campaigner. He only has time for a sound bite before and after court and maybe a quick trip to a bodega. Merchan has neutralized Trump’s greatest weakness of saying things that his base loves but that turn off swing voters.

    • #13
  14. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    All we can do to stop this is re-elect him.

    • #14
  15. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    I wish the voters would punish them.

    But, based on responses I have seen to the Florida documents trial, apparently, putting a trail date off because the Prosecution lied about its handling of evidence and admits it, proves the Judge is corrupt.

    There’s a reason that the first thing revolutionaries do is take over the media.

    That’s what they did here. That’s how they can successfully mind-control the populace into accepting so much injustice.

    I suppose the question is, short of another Revolution, how do we take back the media?

     

    MRC pushes back.

    • #15
  16. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    All we can do to stop this is re-elect him.

    They act like they will never be out of office.  I think that is because they intend to have absolute control over the ballot box.

    They cannot survive if they get out of office.  They will bend and break every law and social norm that they can to ensure that they remain in power.

    • #16
  17. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    All we can do to stop this is re-elect him.

    They act like they will never be out of office. I think that is because they intend to have absolute control over the ballot box.

    They cannot survive if they get out of office. They will bend and break every law and social norm that they can to ensure that they remain in power.

    Of course, because that’s what they accuse Trump of.

    • #17
  18. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    All we can do to stop this is re-elect him.

    They act like they will never be out of office. I think that is because they intend to have absolute control over the ballot box.

    They cannot survive if they get out of office. They will bend and break every law and social norm that they can to ensure that they remain in power.

    True, but don’t forget who “they” are. There are enough Republican sellouts to protect the out-of-office left from the fallout, and enough to subvert reform at every level. That’s their history, and an election won’t be enough to change them.

    • #18
  19. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    Barfly (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I think we keep hoping someone in authority is going to step up and slap down all these evil prosecutors and judges.

    That’s not going to happen.

    When the highest law enforcement body in the nation is itself is corrupt, to what higher authority do you appeal?

    God? I guess we need to put all the imprecatory Psalms on endless repeat.

    All we can do to stop this is re-elect him.

    They act like they will never be out of office. I think that is because they intend to have absolute control over the ballot box.

    They cannot survive if they get out of office. They will bend and break every law and social norm that they can to ensure that they remain in power.

    True, but don’t forget who “they” are. There are enough Republican sellouts to protect the out-of-office left from the fallout, and enough to subvert reform at every level. That’s their history, and an election won’t be enough to change them.

    Yes, including the most perfidious Speaker ever to stain the Capitol.

    • #19
  20. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):

    I wish I was back in law school now. I wonder how the professors would teach rules of evidence and civil procedure in light of this case. I presume the professors would be against Trump, and of the “by any means necessary” interpretation of law, yet still have a duty to instruct in the law.

    Well, I don’t really wish I was in law school now. I imagine it to be a terribly hostile environment for anyone not far left of center.

    The law school from which I graduated a little over forty years ago has in the last ten years, at least as it shows in course titles and curriculum programs, reduced teaching actual law and put more emphasis on who should win, and who deserves (or doesn’t deserve) the benefits of law. 

    • #20
  21. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):

    I wish I was back in law school now. I wonder how the professors would teach rules of evidence and civil procedure in light of this case. I presume the professors would be against Trump, and of the “by any means necessary” interpretation of law, yet still have a duty to instruct in the law.

    Well, I don’t really wish I was in law school now. I imagine it to be a terribly hostile environment for anyone not far left of center.

    The law school from which I graduated a little over forty years ago has in the last ten years, at least as it shows in course titles and curriculum programs, reduced teaching actual law and put more emphasis on who should win, and who deserves (or doesn’t deserve) the benefits of law.

    Legal system? If I were chosen for jury duty, I would not take on face value what a lawyer says. 

    • #21
  22. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):

    I wish I was back in law school now. I wonder how the professors would teach rules of evidence and civil procedure in light of this case. I presume the professors would be against Trump, and of the “by any means necessary” interpretation of law, yet still have a duty to instruct in the law.

    Well, I don’t really wish I was in law school now. I imagine it to be a terribly hostile environment for anyone not far left of center.

    The law school from which I graduated a little over forty years ago has in the last ten years, at least as it shows in course titles and curriculum programs, reduced teaching actual law and put more emphasis on who should win, and who deserves (or doesn’t deserve) the benefits of law.

    Yikes!

    • #22
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.