Attorney Jonathan Turley claimed that adult film star Stormy Daniels’ claim of not seeking money from former President Donald Trump was shattered during her cross-examination in Manhattan Criminal Court. Trump became the first former president in U.S. history to stand trial in a criminal case, facing 34 counts of falsifying business records related to hush money paid to Daniels during his 2016 presidential campaign. Daniels alleged she had an affair with Trump in 2006, which he denied, leading to the charges against him. Despite pleading not guilty and stating the case is politically motivated, Trump’s legal troubles continued.
During her testimony, Daniels revealed that she initially did an interview about her alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 for a story that was never published. She stated that her motivation was to prevent others from profiting off her story and to control the narrative herself. However, it was revealed that her former publicist was trying to sell her story to news outlets in 2016, prompting Daniels to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with Trump and his former lawyer Michael Cohen. Despite claiming that money was not her motivation, Daniels admitted that the $130,000 payment was the result of Cohen’s interest in buying the rights to her story.
Legal analyst Jonathan Turley pointed to a taped conversation between Daniels and her former lawyer Keith Davidson as evidence that she had in fact been motivated by money. During cross-examination, Daniels was questioned about her interaction with Davidson and the urgency she expressed regarding getting money before the election to maintain leverage and value in her story. Turley noted that Trump’s attorney Susan Necheles further pressed Daniels about her actions after the story was made public, including interviews, a book deal, a strip tour titled “Make America Horny Again,” and merchandise sales. Despite Daniels claiming that she did not want to publicly reveal her encounter with Trump, her subsequent actions suggest a desire for financial gain.
Attorney and legal analyst Norm Eisen praised Daniels’ toughness during her cross-examination, noting that she performed well under pressure. However, some critics, such as lawyer George Conway, questioned the defense’s focus on Daniels’ post-story activities, including the “Make America Horny Again” tour promotions. The proceedings revealed a combination of personal animus and financial aspirations on Daniels’ part, contradicting her initial claims of not seeking money from Trump. The trial marked a significant legal battle for Trump and cast a spotlight on the complex dynamics between public figures, their accusers, and the media.
Overall, the legal proceedings involving Stormy Daniels and Donald Trump shed light on the intersection of politics, media, and personal motives in high-profile cases. The examination of Daniels’ testimony, motivations, and subsequent actions raised questions about her credibility and intentions in pursuing legal action against the former president. The case highlighted the challenges of navigating the legal system amidst public scrutiny and political agendas, as both parties sought to defend their positions and reputations. Despite the controversy and conflicting narratives surrounding the case, the pursuit of justice and accountability remained central to the proceedings, shaping the outcome and implications for all involved.
