╌>

Judge allows Stormy Daniels to give irrelevant, salacious testimony just to humiliate Trump

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  s  •  2 months ago  •  62 comments

Judge allows Stormy Daniels to give irrelevant, salacious testimony just to humiliate Trump
The value of the testimony was entirely sensational and gratuitous, yet Merchan was fine with humiliating Trump.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T










Before the start of the Manhattan prosecution of former President Donald Trump, I characterized  the case of District Attorney Alvin Bragg as based on a type of obscenity standard.





In a 1964 pornography case, Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart  wrote , “I shall not today attempt further to define [obscenity]. … But I know it when I see it.”

Bragg has refused to clearly define the crime that Trump was seeking to conceal when payments for a non-disclosure agreement were listed as a legal expense.

We would just know it when we saw it at trial.

We are still waiting, but this week, Bragg seems to be prosecuting an   actual   obscenity case.


The prosecution fought with Trump’s defense counsel to not only call porn star Stormy Daniels to the stand, but to ask her for lurid details on her alleged tryst with Trump.

The only assurance that they would make to Justice Juan Merchan was that they would “not go into details of genitalia.”

For Merchan, who has largely ruled against Trump on such motions, that was enough.

He allowed the prosecutors to get into the details of the affair despite the immateriality of the evidence to any criminal theory.

Neither the NDA nor the payment to Daniels is being contested.

It is also uncontested that Trump wanted to pay to get the story (and other stories, including untrue allegations) from being published.

The value of the testimony was   entirely   sensational and gratuitous, yet Merchan was fine with humiliating Trump.

Daniels’ testimony was a dumpster fire in the courtroom.

The most maddening moment for the defense came at the lunch break, when Merchan stated, “I agree that it would have been better if some of these things had been left unsaid.”

He then denied a motion for a mistrial based on the testimony and blamed the defense for not objecting more.

That, of course, ignores the standing objection of the defense to Daniels even appearing, and specific objections to the broad scope allowed by the court.

This is   precisely   what the defense said would happen when the prosecutors only agreed to avoid “genitalia.”

There was no reason for Daniels to appear at all in the trial.

Even if he was adamant about allowing her, Merchan could have imposed a much more limited scope for her testimony.

He could also have enforced the limits that he did place on the testimony when it was being ignored by both the prosecutors and the witness.

Merchan said he is considering a limiting instruction for the jury to ignore aspects of the testimony.

But that is little comfort for the defendant.

The court was told that this would happen, it happened, and now the court wants to ask the jury to pretend that it did not happen.

Merchan knows there is no way for the jury to unhear the testimony.

More importantly, the prosecution knew that from the outset.

Daniels appeared eager to share the stories for the same reason that she was eager to sell her story. While she said that she “hates” Trump and wants him “held accountable,” Daniels is no victim.

She had an alleged tryst with Trump and then sought to cash in on the story.

It is a standard form of extortion of celebrities.

She later sought to cash in on the notoriety by appearing in strip clubs as part of a “Make America Horny Again” tour.

She is in her element in Merchan’s courtroom.

In New York, the relevance or credibility of witnesses like Daniels is largely immaterial.

This is a district that voted  against Trump, 84.5% to 14.5 %, in the 2020 presidential election.

New Yorkers elected a state attorney general, Letitia James, who  ran on the pledge to bag Trump  on something — without specifying any crime.

Bragg then indicted Trump  without clearly defining any crime   — a debate that continues among legal experts after two weeks of testimony.

This is entertainment for many in New York — as is the thrill of the possibility of his going to jail under Merchan’s poorly written and arguably unconstitutional gag order.

When it comes to a thrilling trial, whom better to call than Daniels?

After all, she has been treated as a heroine by many, even being given the  key to the city of West Hollywood , California, on “Stormy Daniels Day.”

Well, it was Stormy Daniels Day in Merchan’s courtroom this week, and it is a bit late for the court to express shock over her testimony.

It is not the witness, but the case that seems increasingly obscene.

You have a judge who should have recused himself given his daughter’s major role as a Democratic activist and fundraiser.

You have a gag order that is allowing a New York Supreme Court justice to regulate what the leading candidate for the presidency may say in an election on the weaponization of the legal system.

You have a lead prosecutor, Matthew Colangelo, who not only left the Biden Justice Department to revive this case, but  once worked for the Democratic National Committee

You have a case based on two dead misdemeanors shocked back into life by a still-mysterious theory of an undefined crime.

In comparison, Daniels may be the only authentic part of the entire case in New York v. Trump.







Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
[]
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Sean Treacy    2 months ago

It's a totally legitimate case! Not political at all! 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    2 months ago
Not political at all! 

The insistent denial of those visiting here is truly amazing.

I think the only way it doesn't get acknowledged is if one suspends reality and lives in La La Land.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    2 months ago

Poor judge Merchan, he made a mistake. He told the jury to disregard her comments which are now front-page news in leftist media outlets.

Hey, it happens.

/ S

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
2  Hal A. Lujah    2 months ago

Maybe Trump shouldn’t be raw dogging porn stars while his wife is at home taking care of their newborn in the first place.  I bet that would cost him votes if voters knew about it - which is why this case exists.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2    2 months ago

One would have had to be off the grid or simply not interested to be so unaware.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
2.1.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1    2 months ago

Not everybody reads tabloid trash.  Trump’s life is their lifeblood.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.1    2 months ago

If you read newspapers, read online news, or watch television news over the last eight years and didn't know about this, you weren't paying attention !

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
2.1.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.2    2 months ago

Does it matter?  Those who voted for Trump knew that they were voting for a sleazebag who admits to grabbing women by their twat, and claims that the women are okay with that because he’s such a celebrity.  Trump’s deranged supporters are the problem.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.3    2 months ago

Apparently it does matter, because your post seemed to indicate if voters only knew.

My point is voters did and do know!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.1.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.1    2 months ago
Not everybody reads tabloid trash.

Wasn't the "tabloid trash" a witness for the prosecution?

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
2.1.6  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.4    2 months ago

Ever notice that your point is always in defense of Donald Trump?  He finds you quite useful.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.6    2 months ago

You are simply wrong.

I wish people would stop equating something logical, true, and proven as some defense of Trump. It's tiresome.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.1.8  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.7    2 months ago

"Defending Trump" seems to have taken the place of accusations of Racism, Nazis and any other juvenile name thrown at people that don't fall lockstep into thinking everything Donald does is evil. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.8    2 months ago

The hallmark of having no legitimate argument.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.10  JohnRussell  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.3    2 months ago
Trump’s deranged supporters are the problem.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.1.11  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.6    2 months ago
Ever notice that your point is always in defense of Donald Trump?

Ever notice how any comment that goes against your (generally) false narrative is labeled "in defense of Trump"?  We find it quite tiresome.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.1.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.10    2 months ago

It must be a real bitch when the narrative gets torn apart with fact.  

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Guide
2.1.13  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.11    2 months ago

What’s false about it?  It’s all true, which is why Trump was throwing money at women to shut them up.  You are quite useful for Trump too.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Principal
2.1.14  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.13    2 months ago
What’s false about it?

The short list is what have you been correct about.  None have been able to prove a single thing you've claimed. So far every little thing you and the left have ranted about has turned out to be a very long stretch of the imagination, made up, or just flat out lies.  And that's with the federal government carrying out the investigations.

which is why Trump was throwing money at women to shut them up.

So really he's no better than John Edwards or Bill Clinton.  But there wasn't anything going after them now was there.  I wonder why.  Oh, that's right.  The Democrats aren't afraid of Edwards or Clinton.

You are quite useful for Trump too.

That's one opinion.  I've never declared I support him.  I have called out the Democrat hypocrisy that you've falsely called support.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.15  Tessylo  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2.1.13    2 months ago

Don't forget Karen McDougal - another bimbo the former 'president' was boinking while married to which wife?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.15    2 months ago
Don't forget Karen McDougal

Never!

She is one beautiful woman!

 
 
 
goose is back
Sophomore Guide
2.2  goose is back  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2    2 months ago
if voters knew about it - which is why this case exist

You just explained the whole case, it's not about the "LAW" it's about interference in the 2024 election!

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.3  Right Down the Center  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2    2 months ago
which is why this case exists.

So  you also think it was politically motivated.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.4  Ronin2  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2    2 months ago

So hold a trial just to out Trump's affairs!

Fucking brilliant use of our legal system! 

Democrats and leftists must be so damn proud about turning our justice system into something any dictator in the world would be proud of.

Congrats!/S

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.5  Tessylo  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2    2 months ago

Yeah and that prick Comey's October surprise about Hillary.  As far as I'm concerned Hillary actually won.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.5.1  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.5    2 months ago

Election denier!!!!!

 
 
 
goose is back
Sophomore Guide
2.5.2  goose is back  replied to  Tessylo @2.5    2 months ago
As far as I'm concerned Hillary actually won

If you say that about Trump, they throw you in jail. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
3  Right Down the Center    2 months ago

Allowing this will go a long way in showing people that this is about Trump and the election since it was totally unnecessary to the case.

What is even sadder is that so many people seem to live their sex life through Trump.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4  TᵢG    2 months ago

Poor Trump.   So abused.   So misunderstood.   Just terrible what those mean people are doing to this nice man.    

196

Trump is a scoundrel.   This endless defense of Trump is pathetic.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
4.1  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 months ago
Trump is a scoundrel.   

Good point.   People often forget that codicil to the Constitution that throws rules of evidence  out the window and allows taxpayer dollars to be spent embarrassing someone in Court just because they are a scoundrel. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1    2 months ago

Not the point I made.   Another dishonest post from you.

My point is that this over-the-too excuse-making for a scoundrel is irrational.   

The endless defense of Trump is pathetic.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
4.1.2  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.1    2 months ago
Not the point I made.   Another dishonest post from you

Lol. Own your words. 

e endless defense of Trump is pathetic.

You should learn what those words mean before you use them.  Pointing out that the Judge abused his power and allowed pointless testimony isn't a "defense of Trump"  It's a criticism of the Judge. DO you see the difference? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.3  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.1    2 months ago

Every single last one of the right wingers here wants Trump, the worst person in modern American political history, to get back in office. 

It is pointless to approach this forum with any other view of them. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    2 months ago
Every single last one of the right wingers here wants Trump,

That isn't accurate at all.

I am sure most leftwingers would say I am a right winger and I don't want Trump.

I think your post is a false, sweeping generalization.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4.1.5  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    2 months ago

Take care of the human piece of shit you (collectively) put into the White House. He and his administration have surpassed anything you have dreamt up about Trump doing.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @4.1.5    2 months ago

[]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.2    2 months ago
Pointing out that the Judge abused his power and allowed pointless testimony isn't a "defense of Trump"  It's a criticism of the Judge.

For some, anything short of constant condemnation of all things Trump is a defense of him.

It's downright weird.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.2    2 months ago

Attacking those in opposition to Trump is precisely defense of Trump.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    2 months ago

IMO, anyone who consistently defends Trump and/or makes excuses for Trump is going to vote for him no matter what claims they make to the contrary.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.8    2 months ago

not necessarily, it depends on the specifics.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.9    2 months ago

You are entitled to your opinion even when it flies in the face of facts.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
4.1.12  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.8    2 months ago
Attacking those in opposition to Trump is precisely defense of Trump.

Exactly the same as voting for Biden is the same as supporting him.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
4.1.13  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.1    2 months ago
The endless defense of Trump is pathetic.

The endless attack on everything Trump does is pathetic.  There are enough real things to ding him for but when the truth is stretched or downright ignored it makes the person making those endless claims have 0 credibility.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @4.1.13    2 months ago
There are enough real things to ding him for but when the truth is stretched or downright ignored it makes the person making those endless claims have 0 credibility.

That is true.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
4.1.15  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.3    2 months ago
Every single last one of the right wingers here wants Trump, the worst person in modern American political history, to get back in office. 

It is that type of false claim that leads one to believe credibility has taken a vacation.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @4.1.15    2 months ago

Vacation?

Try an extended leave of absence.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
4.1.17  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.8    2 months ago
Attacking those in opposition to Trump is precisely defense of Trump.

farp,small,wall_texture,product,750x1000.jpg

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
4.1.18  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.9    2 months ago
IMO, anyone who consistently defends Trump and/or makes excuses for Trump is going to vote for him no matter what claims they make to the contrary.

Everyone is welcome to their opinion, even when it is wrong.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.19  TᵢG  replied to  Right Down the Center @4.1.13    2 months ago
The endless attack on everything Trump does is pathetic.

Show me where I have unfairly attacked Trump.   And if you cannot do that, then do not reply to a post and, in so doing, insinuate that I have.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.20  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.11    2 months ago

Show where I have stated anything that flies in the face of fact.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.21  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.20    2 months ago

Sure, no problem.

post 4.1.9.

post 4.1.8

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.22  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.21    2 months ago

@4.1.8 is spot on.   

@4.1.9 is my opinion - clearly stated as such.  It was not stated as a fact.

If this is all you have then you have nothing, as expected.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.23  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.22    2 months ago

4.1.8 is far from 'spot on' and ridiculous.

[deleted][]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.24  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.8    2 months ago
Attacking those in opposition to Trump is precisely defense of Trump.

Explain how any attack of those in opposition to Trump is a defense of Trump.

That doesn't even make any sense at all.

What exactly are you claiming it defends him FROM?

Did it defend him in court?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
4.1.25  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.19    2 months ago
do not reply to a post

Thanks for your suggestion.  I will take it under advisement.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
4.1.26  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.19    2 months ago

[deleted][]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 months ago

The endless defense of the indefensible is so fucking tiresome

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4.2.1  JBB  replied to  Tessylo @4.2    2 months ago

The Permian Basin has nothing on MAGA for gas lighting...

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4.3  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 months ago

Trump is entitled to the same rights and protections under the law as everyone else.

The fact Democrats/leftists are abusing the legal system in order to win an election is obscene.

Seems the only ones that are safe have a D behind their name; or are a part of the Democrat base. Namely criminals, far left domestic terrorists, and whomever they think they can use against their opponents/enemies.

It is very telling who is supporting this kangaroo court.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.3.1  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @4.3    2 months ago
Trump is entitled to the same rights and protections under the law as everyone else.

Yes he is.   Your point implies that the system is being unfair to him yet you ignore the deference and legal cooperation provided Trump throughout this process.

The fact Democrats/leftists are abusing the legal system in order to win an election is obscene.

Conspiracy theories ... getting real old.   Again you clearly blot out all the breaks provided to Trump and focus only on the fact that he is being tried and potentially being held legally accountable for his wrongdoing per the rule of law.

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
5  Hallux    2 months ago

Meh, get a grip Turely, Trump is the master of self humiliation.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
6  JBB    2 months ago

When a married politician screws a porn star, engages in a criminal conspiracy to pay the porn star off and keep her quiet and then he fraudulently tries to write the entire thing off as attorney fees in order to illegally influence a Presidential election, the details are salacious...

 
 

Who is online




33 visitors