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

Latest Breaking News

Warpy

(114,746 posts)

13. I think it was a misatake allowing her to elaborate on anything

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2024, 05:34 PM

May 2024

She has no use for TFG, to know him is to loathe him. However, she should have been confined to "yes/no" answers to establish the timeline for the affair and the payoff, I don't see anything else she has to say particularly germane to the case, except whether or not she was allowed to speak out after the election by the terms of the agreement..

Now outside the courthouse is completely different. She can rattle on forever about what a shit he is.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trump loses bid for mistrial in hush money case [View all] BumRushDaShow May 2024 OP

His lawyers are saying that Daniels' testimony will prejudice the jury against him birdographer May 2024 #1

Agree republianmushroom May 2024 #5

Good one!! AZ8theist May 2024 #10

This worries me somewhat. Even if there is no mistrial declared, you can bet generalbetrayus May 2024 #7

I agree with you Raven123 May 2024 #8

ABC: Judge denies motion for mistrial after Stormy Daniels alleged sexual encounter testimony riversedge May 2024 #2

They were desperately hoping for a mistrial -- "no objection coming from the defense". Hermit-The-Prog May 2024 #4

Trump was AWAKE today: "Trump was furiously writing notes and passing them to Blanche during Daniels testimony."....... riversedge May 2024 #9

Ha ha, my first thought as well: oh, he stayed awake today! crickets May 2024 #11

Just as long as her testimony Blue Idaho May 2024 #3

I think it's posturing to maintain unity in the caucus ColinC May 2024 #6

IF he never had sex with her, one note would have been more than enough. world wide wally May 2024 #12

Chump is such a cheap bastard, he never would have paid her if it hadn't happened FakeNoose May 2024 #15

I think it was a misatake allowing her to elaborate on anything Warpy May 2024 #13

They made it clear that only one person enjoyed the encounter FakeNoose May 2024 #16

I doubt if he ever onsidered asking her Warpy May 2024 #17

I think the details actually give her more credibility as a witness Bayard May 2024 #14

"Your Honor, the jury is now biased against my micro-penis and inability to last more than 2 minutes in bed!" Tarc May 2024 #18

Grasp at every straw you can oasis May 2024 #19