Former President Donald Trump’s ongoing hush money criminal trial on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records is connected to a payment that was made to adult film star Stormy Daniels to benefit his 2016 presidential campaign.
Daniels testified on Tuesday revealing salacious details of her 2006 Lake Tahoe hotel night in hotel room with the former president, and she’s expected to take the witness stand again on Thursday.
MSNBC’s Deadline: White House host Nicolle Wallace spoke with analyst and former US Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) about the implications of Daniels’ testimony.
READ MORE: Stormy Daniels confirmed as witness minutes after Trump deletes post about her
“She got $130,000. Full stop. That is a fact; that is on the record,” Wallace said. “It’s on paper, it’s in emails, and stipulated to but everyone from [star witness and former Trump lawyer] Michael Cohen, to [witness and former National Enquirer publisher] David Pecker, uncle [witness and Stormy Daniels’ ex-lawyer] Keith Davidson.”
Wallace continued, “No one has testified to Trump’s generosity, of spirit or finances. When you deal with the current issues alleged to be crimes, how did you think that she did?”
McCaskill replied, “Well, it’s not unusual for witnesses who are nervous to do what we call ‘talking beyond the question.’ Especially on direct exam. And I was not there, I did not observe her testifying, but it did appear from following the coverage of the trial that she was talking beyond the question. made the judge uncomfortable, and that’s never good.
“The fact that the defense did not object probably has more to do with whether or not she was hurting them or helping them,” the former senator continued. “They must’ve thought that the way that she was testifying was helping them. All of that set aside, the bottom line is, did Trump know that they were covering up this payment with false business records? That is really the crux of the case.”
READ MORE: ‘Bizarre timeline’: Columnist laments ‘political madness’ of Stormy Daniels’ lurid testimony
The former senator emphasized, “I think this was a dangerous witness to put on for both sides,” explaining, “One of the reasons, I wanted to mention, I think the prosecution had to put her on, was to basically lay the groundwork If Trump were to take the stand, because if Trump were to take the stand, just imagine the cross examination that would occur. If they had not put her on, it would have been easier for him to take the stand, and deny any. of this ever happened. For being there and testifying about it, now really puts them in a box. Is he going to get up there and bald face lie that he was never in that hotel room with her, or never saw her in Trump Tower? That makes it very difficult for him to take the stand, and withstand the kind of cross examination he would obtain.”
Watch the video below or at this link.
Why Stormy Daniels ‘was a dangerous witness to put on for both sides’: analystwww.youtube.com
