Judge Denies Trump's Mistrial Request Over Stormy Daniels Testimony

[jerrymahoney]

Just now, Danderman123 said:

I guess there is never a felony when Trump is involved, per your understanding.

No. You just are not stating accurately the 2 separate laws involved.

[Walker88]

Once the jury was dismissed on Thursday, the defense tried to argue that the details Stormy exposed on the stand are so salacious, that they jury could be tainted by it, which defense argues would be prejudicial to their client. It would seem defense is doing this not to actually gain a mistrial, but rather to lay the groundwork for a future appeal.

 

Prosecution countered with two points:

 

1) That they sealed many additional details Stormy shared with them, such as trump’s physicality, but if need be, she could be asked about this in redirect

 

2) The point of the minimal details Stormy provided was to establish the overall embarrassing nature of the (alleged) tryst, giving reason why trump would want the entire tale ‘caught and killed’, as it would hurt him in the election. Absent those minimally salacious details (butt spanking, lack of condom use, trump undressing down to his underwear while Stormy went to the bathroom), the prosecution said it could not establish sufficient cause for trump to want the story quashed.

 

(A former National Enquirer editor appeared on a TV broadcast today and said if the story had been made public in Oct 2016, it would be on the front page of his former tabloid. He is not a witness, so it's only his opinion, of course.)

 

The judge would not declare a mistrial, as the prosecution’s arguments make much more sense, besides the fact he had asked defense if there were areas they would not want the Stormy testimony to go, and defense declined to object before Stormy took the stand.

[bendejo]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump invited her testimony by claiming he never had sex with her.

That was merely where the spinning wheel stopped at that particular moment.

Other chances on the wheel are "I don't know her," "I never met her," and more that he's come out with over the years. 

Should have asked her to describe DT's weenie, and then DT will have to go into the judges chambers and show Merchan his family jewels.

 

[Danderman123]

Hey, MAGA people!

 

Do you think Trump will testify to deny he had sex with Stormy Daniels?

 

Do you think he had sex with Stormy Daniels?

Edited May 10 by Danderman123

[Walker88]

Interesting take by a former Federal prosecutor, who reminds us that it makes no difference if the Stormy testimony is true or not (though it sure is in line with trump’s character or lack thereof). The point is the payoff to have the story suppressed, which makes it illegal.

 

Note that actual falsehoods produced and published about HRC in 2016 by the GRU’s Internet Research Agency (Uranium One, HRC’s health) were not ‘caught and killed’ by her campaign. Had trump the steely-ness of HRC, instead of his woefully fragile ego, he wouldn’t be where he is today (though likely still sleeping in separate bedrooms from his 3rd wife).

[Walker88]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

Hey, MAGA people!

 

Do you think Trump will testify to deny he had sex with Stormy Daniels?

 

Do you think he had sex with Stormy Daniels?

Since he did it 'no condom', perhaps trump will appeal to the Supreme Court to rule he is immune from STDs.

[bendejo]

He's never met her, he doesn't know her, and he's paid her off for ????

 

[G_Money]

29 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Hey, MAGA people!

 

Do you think Trump will testify to deny he had sex with Stormy Daniels?

 

Do you think he had sex with Stormy Daniels?

Do you think he will?

 

Do you think he did?

[G_Money]

43 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Once the jury was dismissed on Thursday, the defense tried to argue that the details Stormy exposed on the stand are so salacious, that they jury could be tainted by it, which defense argues would be prejudicial to their client. It would seem defense is doing this not to actually gain a mistrial, but rather to lay the groundwork for a future appeal.

 

Prosecution countered with two points:

 

1) That they sealed many additional details Stormy shared with them, such as trump’s physicality, but if need be, she could be asked about this in redirect

 

2) The point of the minimal details Stormy provided was to establish the overall embarrassing nature of the (alleged) tryst, giving reason why trump would want the entire tale ‘caught and killed’, as it would hurt him in the election. Absent those minimally salacious details (butt spanking, lack of condom use, trump undressing down to his underwear while Stormy went to the bathroom), the prosecution said it could not establish sufficient cause for trump to want the story quashed.

 

(A former National Enquirer editor appeared on a TV broadcast today and said if the story had been made public in Oct 2016, it would be on the front page of his former tabloid. He is not a witness, so it's only his opinion, of course.)

 

The judge would not declare a mistrial, as the prosecution’s arguments make much more sense, besides the fact he had asked defense if there were areas they would not want the Stormy testimony to go, and defense declined to object before Stormy took the stand.

Read and weep.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/stormy-daniels-salacious-affair-story-keeps-changing-because-encounter-never-happened-trump-team-claims

[Danderman123]

39 minutes ago, G_Money said:

Do you think he will?

 

Do you think he did?

No.

 

Yes.

[Danderman123]

35 minutes ago, G_Money said:

Read and weep.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/stormy-daniels-salacious-affair-story-keeps-changing-because-encounter-never-happened-trump-team-claims

Do you believe Trump never had sex with Stormy Daniels?

 

Yeah, I know you can't answer that.

[Eric Loh]

56 minutes ago, G_Money said:

Read and weep.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/stormy-daniels-salacious-affair-story-keeps-changing-because-encounter-never-happened-trump-team-claims

Not weeping but laughing at your gullibility. By the way, Judge Merchan decline the motion for mistrial twice. 

[G_Money]

22 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Not weeping but laughing at your gullibility. By the way, Judge Merchan decline the motion for mistrial twice. 

“Judge Merchan decline the motion for mistrial twice.”

 

Correct.  As expected by a biased judge.

 

No surprise.

[G_Money]

48 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Do you believe Trump never had sex with Stormy Daniels?

 

Yeah, I know you can't answer that.

I’m quite flattered that you keep insisting on my opinion.  The fact that you regard my opinions in such a positive way is heartwarming.

 

So to satisfy your thirst for the truth.

 

 I believe he never did.  And she has a sworn statement she never did.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, G_Money said:

“Judge Merchan decline the motion for mistrial twice.”

 

Correct.  As expected by a biased judge.

 

No surprise.

As expected in response to meritless motions.

[G_Money]

2 minutes ago, Presto said:

I expected trumpeters to start bragging about their junk in this thread, but it still took a couple of days.

Jealously is a strong emotion.

[Danderman123]

33 minutes ago, G_Money said:

I’m quite flattered that you keep insisting on my opinion.  The fact that you regard my opinions in such a positive way is heartwarming.

 

So to satisfy your thirst for the truth.

 

 I believe he never did.  And she has a sworn statement she never did.

You have consumed waaaaay too much Kool-Ade.

[Danderman123]

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

You mean the "me-too" movement? That all ended with Tara Reade. 

 

Joe Biden sexual assault allegation

 

 

It's typical for Trump supporters to throw in debunked claims, the idea is to repeat the lie enough that it is believed.

 

 

[Walker88]

2 hours ago, G_Money said:

Read and weep.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/stormy-daniels-salacious-affair-story-keeps-changing-because-encounter-never-happened-trump-team-claims

Even if we believe the unbelievable (that trump never had sex with Stormy), it's totally irrelevant with regard to the case.

 

The issue is did he authorize the payment of hush money to stop publication and account for it fraudulently.

 

You see, there actually were plenty of lies published about Hillary in 2016, mostly tied to the GRU's Internet Research Agency. Hillary, much tougher than trump, did not feel it necessary to pay anyone off to suppress the lies. Thus, Hillary was never charged.

 

[Presto]

12 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Dreamers. Legends in their own addled brains.

 

trumpers have delusions of grandeur. They came to Thailand because they think Thai women might not know they are challenged in a manly way. For a couple thousand baht the women will even pretend they're satisfied. Get a real date? The women have higher standards.

 

Remember trump's reaction when Marco Rubio made mention of his small hands in the R debate? Stormy cleared up that delusion.

 

trump owns the Incel demographic. They all come up both short and empty....though not empty-handed, IYKWIM.

 

Keep tickling their fragile egos and they'll download images of John Holmes and claim it's them. One fellow I tickled by suggesting obesity was so rattled, he took photos of his clothes drawer with waist size. Imagine that level of insecurity and gay-ness!

I agree with you, mostly. I may have a different opinion about Thai women, bar or non-bar.

 

Like Trump himself, trumpeters like to brag, and I'm not particularly interested in their actual experiences, their actual physical appearance, etc.

Although I understand that the mere mention of a porn star gets their engine running. So my post was just an observation.

 

 

Edited May 10 by Presto

[Hawaiian]

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

Dreamers. Legends in their own addled brains.

 

trumpers have delusions of grandeur. They came to Thailand because they think Thai women might not know they are challenged in a manly way. For a couple thousand baht the women will even pretend they're satisfied. Get a real date? The women have higher standards.

 

Remember trump's reaction when Marco Rubio made mention of his small hands in the R debate? Stormy cleared up that delusion.

 

trump owns the Incel demographic. They all come up both short and empty....though not empty-handed, IYKWIM.

 

Keep tickling their fragile egos and they'll download images of John Holmes and claim it's them. One fellow I tickled by suggesting obesity was so rattled, he took photos of his clothes drawer with waist size. Imagine that level of insecurity and gay-ness!

Why are you so obsessed with sex.  Most men who constantly talk about the subject are usually poorly endowed or poor performers, or both.

[Danderman123]

30 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

Why are you so obsessed with sex.  Most men who constantly talk about the subject are usually poorly endowed or poor performers, or both.

You lost the plot.

 

This topic is about Trump's bad behavior with Stormy Daniels.

[Danderman123]

There aren't any style points given at trials, or else Stormy Daniels would have sunk Trump already. She ran rings around Trump's lawyer yesterday, who was reduced to asking stupid and pointless questions.

 

Trump is basically just hoping for a holdout juror who can hang the jury, little chance of an actual acquittal.

[placeholder]

Trump's lawyers are so bad at defending their client that even the Judge scolds them for it

 

Judge Merchan chides Trump’s lawyers for not objecting more during Stormy Daniels’ testimony

The judge responded to their arguments saying, “For some unexplained reason that I still don’t understand” there was no objection to certain testimony cited in the motion for a mistrial and again today.

Merchan specifically pointed to Daniels’ testimony about the trailer park, in which Daniels suggested Trump told her she would be stuck living in a trailer park before they had sex in 2006. The judge said he felt that was unnecessary and he objected himself.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/09/politics/judge-merchan-calls-out-trump-attorneys-mistrial/index.html

[Yellowtail]

9 hours ago, Walker88 said:

Once the jury was dismissed on Thursday, the defense tried to argue that the details Stormy exposed on the stand are so salacious, that they jury could be tainted by it, which defense argues would be prejudicial to their client. It would seem defense is doing this not to actually gain a mistrial, but rather to lay the groundwork for a future appeal.

 

Prosecution countered with two points:

 

1) That they sealed many additional details Stormy shared with them, such as trump’s physicality, but if need be, she could be asked about this in redirect

 

2) The point of the minimal details Stormy provided was to establish the overall embarrassing nature of the (alleged) tryst, giving reason why trump would want the entire tale ‘caught and killed’, as it would hurt him in the election. Absent those minimally salacious details (butt spanking, lack of condom use, trump undressing down to his underwear while Stormy went to the bathroom), the prosecution said it could not establish sufficient cause for trump to want the story quashed.

 

(A former National Enquirer editor appeared on a TV broadcast today and said if the story had been made public in Oct 2016, it would be on the front page of his former tabloid. He is not a witness, so it's only his opinion, of course.)

 

The judge would not declare a mistrial, as the prosecution’s arguments make much more sense, besides the fact he had asked defense if there were areas they would not want the Stormy testimony to go, and defense declined to object before Stormy took the stand.

None of which has anything to do with the charges. 

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Trump's lawyers are so bad at defending their client that even the Judge scolds them for it

 

 

I am beginning to think that Trump's lawyers are so irritated by him that they are mailing it in.

[Danderman123]

Just now, Yellowtail said:

None of which has anything to do with the charges. 

You are correct.

 

But Trump's lawyers opened the door for this testimony when they claimed that Trump never had sex with Stormy Daniels. 

 

That was a bad move, but Trump probably demanded it.

 

Trump could have helped by providing his attorneys with contradictory evidence, maybe that he didn't stay stay in that hotel that night (how would Stormy Daniels even know what hotel he was in?). But, he gave them nothing.

[Yellowtail]

6 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Joe Biden sexual assault allegation

 

 

It's typical for Trump supporters to throw in debunked claims, the idea is to repeat the lie enough that it is believed.

 

 

Only debunked by the left. 

 

But what I said was, that the "me-too" ended when Tara Reade accused Biden of sexually assaulting her. 

 

And that Kamala Harris stated that she believed the women that accused Biden of molesting them. 

 

Both statements are true, regardless of what the "fact checkers" say. 

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Trump's lawyers are so bad at defending their client that even the Judge scolds them for it

 

Judge Merchan chides Trump’s lawyers for not objecting more during Stormy Daniels’ testimony

The judge responded to their arguments saying, “For some unexplained reason that I still don’t understand” there was no objection to certain testimony cited in the motion for a mistrial and again today.

Merchan specifically pointed to Daniels’ testimony about the trailer park, in which Daniels suggested Trump told her she would be stuck living in a trailer park before they had sex in 2006. The judge said he felt that was unnecessary and he objected himself.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/09/politics/judge-merchan-calls-out-trump-attorneys-mistrial/index.html

They may have felt it was in Trump's best interest to let her continue. 

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Only debunked by the left. 

 

But what I said was, that the "me-too" ended when Tara Reade accused Biden of sexually assaulting her. 

 

And that Kamala Harris stated that she believed the women that accused Biden of molesting them. 

 

Both statements are true, regardless of what the "fact checkers" say. 

"Me-too" is alive and well.

 

In particular, large numbers of Christian types are being hauled into court for child molestation and the like.