Donald Trump

Daniels seems to be handling things a bit better today. I still don't really think her credibility is the thing that's at issue here anyway, so I'm not sure how much it ultimately matters to the case.

In the most neutral interpretation, she seems like somebody who was misled and taken advantage of by Trump. At first, she just wanted to move past it, but wasn't allowed to because other people were leaking the story. She therefore decided to go public and since then has embellished minor details of her account, and made the most of whatever opportunities she had to derive some financial benefit from it.

But...

Trump still paid her lawyer $130k (this is documented fact).
He still fudged his business accounts (documented fact).
He still likely broke campaign finance laws (to be determined by the jury).

So... even if she is totally making everything up, I don't think it's even particularly relevant. It seems like the Defence are just using this as an opportunity to try and embarrass her or ruin her credibility on behalf of Trump.
 
denislawsbackheel said:
42 prisoners are on federal death row.
Click to expand...
And the GOP want to execute everyone of them as quickly as possible and add hundreds more to the queue.

Because, if history has taught us anything, capital punishment following due process (which can drag on for years), is an effective deterrent to people that have to take a security detail everywhere they go and have their food tasted/tested before they eat it.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
Daniels seems to be handling things a bit better today. I still don't really think her credibility is the thing that's at issue here anyway, so I'm not sure how much it ultimately matters to the case.

In the most neutral interpretation, she seems like somebody who was misled and taken advantage of by Trump. At first, she just wanted to move past it, but wasn't allowed to because other people were leaking the story. She therefore decided to go public and since then has embellished minor details of her account, and made the most of whatever opportunities she had to derive some financial benefit from it.

But...

Trump still paid her lawyer $130k (this is documented fact).
He still fudged his business accounts (documented fact).
He still likely broke campaign finance laws (to be determined by the jury).

So... even if she is totally making everything up, I don't think it's even particularly relevant. It seems like the Defence are just using this as an opportunity to try and embarrass her or ruin her credibility on behalf of Trump.
Click to expand...

And now their completely shit strategy is revealed:

Defence: "Isn't the reason you changed your story many times because you never had an affair with President Trump, and that you've been making money off that story for 12 years?"

If he didn't have an affair with her, then why did he sign an NDA? What was the 130k payment supposedly for? Decorating?

Mind-bogglingly shit lawyering. They have just wasted a day of court time building up to that. But maybe they're playing for whatever time they can get...
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
And now their completely shit strategy is revealed:

Defence: "Isn't the reason you changed your story many times because you never had an affair with President Trump, and that you've been making money off that story for 12 years?"

If he didn't have an affair with her, then why did he sign an NDA? What was the 130k payment supposedly for? Decorating?

Mind-bogglingly shit lawyering. They have just wasted a day of court time building up to that. But maybe they're playing for whatever time they can get...
Click to expand...

It doesn’t even matter if there was an affair.

He still paid to kill the story, and the only thing that actually matters HE STILL FALSIFIED RECORDS TO CONCEAL THE PAYMENTS FROM THE VOTERS.

Whether the affair is real or not has no bearing on the outcome of this case.



But I also think you’re wrong about their strategy, I think it’s just delay and ask for a mistrial every 10 minutes.
 
Newsnight interviewed a friend of Daniels who is another adult film star.
They then had a very angry shouty Republican (Mike Davis?) who was very keen to call her a 'bimbo pornstar'. About 10-12 times, I reckon, even when Kirsty Wark said that she thought that was offensive.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
Newsnight interviewed a friend of Daniels who is another adult film star.
They then had a very angry shouty Republican (Mike Davis?) who was very keen to call her a 'bimbo pornstar'. About 10-12 times, I reckon, even when Kirsty Wark said that she thought that was offensive.
Click to expand...
The GOP never miss an opportunity to demean women. It’s their creed.

That, and “never turn down the chance to let lick the dear leader’s boots clean”.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.