At some deep level, the former adult film star clearly has his number and knows how to hit him where it hurts
…
This impression is extrajudicial. Daniels, who has already been rebuked by the judge for straying off topic, may prove too wayward a witness to achieve what Carroll did: the civil case equivalent of a guilty verdict against a man almost supernaturally able to avoid them. If we are looking beyond verdicts to the public image, however, Daniels is in some ways by far the more menacing foe for Trump. You couldn’t make up the details of her testimony this week, which sent court reporters scrambling to find sober ways to present her account of spanking Trump with a rolled up magazine and insisting on having sex with her without a condom. This is a woman willing to meet Trump at his preferred site of conflict – public humiliation – and on the evidence so far, he isn’t weathering it well.
Last year, during the Carroll hearing, the former president defaulted to the standard tittering, smirking, mocking performance he reserves for critical women – be they accusing him of rape or running against him for president. Accounts from the courtroom this week suggest this persona was no match for Daniels. The Associated Press reported that Trump “squirmed and scowled” during Daniels’ testimony. The Washington Post recorded him in the act of “angry, profane muttering”, which won Trump his own rebuke from the judge. “I understand your client is upset but he is cursing audibly,” said Judge Merchan to Trump’s lawyers. Upset! Go Stormy.
“Can you tell the jury again what his bodyguard told you?”
“That Mr Trump was interested in having me joining him for dinner”
“And what did you say at the time”
“Fuck no!”
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Nonetheless, Trump’s fortunes rest, to a large degree, on her credibility, a 45-year-old former porn star who the New York Times described this week as “a complicated and imperfect witness”.
If Carroll – elegant, measured, articulate – was the perfect victim, Daniels is practically the archetype of the woman court systems tend to revile.
Daniels, who has already been rebuked by the judge for straying off topic, may prove too wayward a witness to achieve what Carroll did: the civil case equivalent of a guilty verdict against a man almost supernaturally able to avoid them.
You couldn’t make up the details of her testimony this week, which sent court reporters scrambling to find sober ways to present her account of spanking Trump with a rolled up magazine and insisting on having sex with her without a condom.
If the narrative he constructed around the Carroll accusation was the classic too-ugly-to-rape defence, this won’t work with Daniels – 30 years his junior and a confident sexual operator who appears hellbent on depicting Trump as a pathetic little man.
Trump has long capitalised on the idea that he is the kind of “pussy-grabbing” sexual aggressor who might enjoy sex with a porn star.
The original article contains 767 words, the summary contains 201 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
“I understand your client is upset but he is cursing audibly,”
Yeah. Whatcha gonna do about it judge? That’s what we thought.
This is a woman willing to meet Trump at his preferred site of conflict – public humiliation – and on the evidence so far, he isn’t weathering it well.
What an excellent sentence
“Did you end up having dinner that night?” “No”
That’s all she was there for - didn’t even get food!
no way lmfao
