As a purely legal matter, Donald Trump’s hush-money/election interference trial is not about the sex, but a single sexual encounter is at the heart of it. The prosecution made an important decision on Tuesday to highlight that in the most graphic way for the jury.
The D.A.’s team called Stormy Daniels, the porn star at the center of this whole imbroglio, to the witness stand to describe her meeting and the tryst she said occurred with Trump in 2006. He denies that, but the case is about whether he falsified records to pay her $130,000 to deny it as well.
Daniels has no incriminating bank statements or other business records to offer in support of the key charges against Trump, but in describing her hardscrabble upbringing and hotel-room sexual encounter with Trump, she has been without doubt the most interesting and engaging witness yet to appear before the jury. Her role appears to be to convince the jury that the sex took place, that it was “traumatizing,” and that Trump by implication is a liar, willing to go to great — and illegal — lengths to hide the encounter from the public.
At the same time, allowing Daniels to testify presents real risks to the prosecution. She has been telling her Trump story for more than a decade now, and it’s evolved over time, which opens the door for defense lawyers to challenge her memory or, worse, her honesty.
As her testimony continued through the morning, in fact, it grew more contentious. Justice Juan Merchan became increasingly impatient with the prosecutors, sustaining numerous objections from Trump’s lawyers and admonishing Daniels to limit her description of the sexual encounter itself. “Just answer the questions,” he said to her. His impatience might rub off on the jury.
This is a common dilemma for those who prosecute crimes, which are generally not committed by people with redoubtable morals. That character flaw can extend to the people they surround themselves with, some of whom (like Michael Cohen) may be convicted criminals themselves, even as they are needed to deliver the most damning evidence against the defendant.
It’s hard to know how the jury will process Daniels’ testimony, but at least she managed something few others have — humiliating Trump to his face. “Are you always this rude?” she recalled asking him after dinner at his hotel room. “Like, you don’t even know how to have a conversation.”
A better summary of the last eight years would be hard to find.
