Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)My wife (a Lawyer) is not thrilled with Stormy Daniels' testimony... [View all]
Her adding unnecessary detail to the sexual activity testimony may offer Trump an appeal on the grounds of tainting the Jury. Reminder that rape/sexual assault, etc. are not charges in this case. All she needed to do is testify that they had sex which Trump needed to cover up.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
66 replies, 4384 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (19)
ReplyReply to this post
66 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
My wife (a Lawyer) is not thrilled with Stormy Daniels' testimony... [View all]
brooklynite
May 2024
OP
Yes. The very fact the defense(apparently) chose not to object is an issue. Their strategy may
hlthe2b
May 2024
#20
Wasn't tRump poking his attorney to object to stuff being said, was that about the details???
a kennedy
May 2024
#17
I agree. He's cheated so many times that "we had sex" would barely raise an eyebrow *
Oopsie Daisy
May 2024
#7
It's not the job of the prosecution to "get the goods out" before the election. Its to get a conviction.
brooklynite
May 2024
#11
On the grounds of tainting the Jury by brining up unrelated character issues about Trump.
brooklynite
May 2024
#31
Yes. We discuss this upstream. Any & all due respect to Brooklynite's attorney wife but...
hlthe2b
May 2024
#39
I think this is why the judge asked Trump's lawyers why they did not object more.
mackdaddy
May 2024
#10
"this will be used in the appeal and it might be why Trumps lawyers did allow it to go as far as it did."
Happy Hoosier
May 2024
#27
And yet the Judge felt the need to tell her to stick to the relevant facts.
brooklynite
May 2024
#16
It was explained that the judge will likely instruct the jury what can be considered.
LiberalFighter
May 2024
#36
this is flat out incorrect. there's no rationale to limit her story to the fact that they had sex
unblock
May 2024
#40
With her profession and personality, she was simply going to go there, no matter what.
bucolic_frolic
May 2024
#59