Trump Attorney Tries Slut-Shaming Stormy Daniels, Gets Zingers In Return | Old North State Wealth News
Connect with us

US News

Trump Attorney Tries Slut-Shaming Stormy Daniels, Gets Zingers In Return

Published

on

Stormy Daniels followed up her first bombshell day of testimony in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial with a second day on the stand Thursday.

The adult film star faced harsher questions today, as Trump lawyer Susan Necheles attempted to discredit Daniels’ earlier testimony in cross examination. She met the onslaught with polite and unyielding confidence.

Necheles cast Daniels as an unconventional anti-Trump cheerleader who was only in it for the money, an accusation Daniels repeatedly swatted down.

At one point Necheles highlighted a $40 “Stormy, Saint of Indictments” prayer candle she sold online, along with assorted other similarly themed items.

Trump’s attorney then accused her of profiting off Trump’s trial by “shilling merchandise,” prompting Daniels to fire back: “Not unlike Mr. Trump.”

The defense also clumsily reminded the jury of Daniels’ pornographic past, accusing her of “selling herself” as an exotic dancer as her anti-Trump stardom grew.

“You have a lot of experience making phony stories about sex,” Necheles said, implying Daniels encounter with Trump was fake.

“Wow. That’s not how I would put it. The sex in the films is very much real, just like what happened to me in that room,” Daniels replied.

She later quipped that if her story about sex with Trump “was untrue, I would have written it to be a lot better.”

Necheles wrapped up her cross examination with a statement-turned-question, saying that Daniels has changed her story “many times” without giving her a chance to respond.

Daniels told the court Tuesday that she found herself in Trump’s penthouse suite after meeting him at a Lake Tahoe golf tournament in the summer of 2006. She went into detail — sometimes too much detail, prompting a rebuke from Judge Juan Merchan — about how he invited her to dinner but wanted to meet beforehand in his hotel room, where ended up sharing a conversation and, she said, had sex.

Trump sat nearby, often closing his eyes. But he became so incensed by Daniels’ testimony that the judge urged his attorneys to warn him against making his feelings so obvious in front of the jury.

“I understand that your client is upset at this point,” Merchan told Trump’s attorneys during a sidebar on Tuesday, “but he is cursing audibly, and he is shaking his head visually and that’s contemptuous.”

“It has the potential to intimidate the witness and the jury can see that,” Merchan went on, according to a transcript viewed by HuffPost. “I am speaking to you here at the bench because I don’t want to embarrass him.”

Daniels spoke in a lighthearted manner with prosecuting attorney Susan Hoffinger, but became more rigid during cross-examination by Trump attorney Susan Necheles, which began Tuesday and continued Thursday, following a break in proceedings Wednesday.

While much of Daniels’ story had already been made public, she gave new details Tuesday that complicate how readily she had consented to the alleged sexual encounter.

Daniels, a porn actor turned writer and director, spoke about “blacking out” during the act, staring up at the ceiling in silence. She felt that because Trump had supposedly offered to land her a spot on “The Apprentice,” she could not refuse his advances.

“There was an imbalance of power for sure,” Daniels said Tuesday on direct examination.

Related…

Read the full article here

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Trending

Copyright © 2022 ONSWM News. Content posted on the Old North State Wealth News page was developed and produced by a third party news aggregation service. Old North State Wealth Management is not affiliated with the news aggregation service. The information presented is believed to be current. It should not be viewed as personalized investment advice. All expressions of opinion reflect the judgment of the authors on the date the articles were published. The information presented is not an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell, any of the securities discussed.