The level of tawdry details
Further installments of squalor and piggishness:
With the third week of testimony drawing to a close, the case that ultimately hinges on record-keeping returned to deeply technical testimony — a sharp contrast from Daniels’ dramatic, if not downright seamy, account of an alleged sexual encounter with Trump that riveted jurors earlier this week. Trump denies they ever had sex.
Daniels’ story of an alleged sexual encounter with Trump was a crucial building block for prosecutors, who are seeking to show that the Republican and his allies buried unflattering stories in the waning weeks of the 2016 presidential election in an effort to illegally influence the race.
Trump walked out of the court in a rage Thursday, angrily telling reporters, “I’m innocent.” His attorneys pushed for a mistrial over the level of tawdry details Daniels went into on the witness stand, but Judge Juan M. Merchan denied the request.
If Trump doesn’t want us to know how tawdry he is, he could always try not being so tawdry.
Witnesses in the case have seesawed between bookkeepers and bankers with often dry testimony to Daniels and others with unflattering stories about Trump and the tabloid world machinations meant to keep them secret. Despite all the drama, in the end, the trial is about money changing hands — business transactions — and whether those payments were made to illegally influence the 2016 election.
Influence it how though? Influence it by concealing how very tawdry Trump really is. It’s ironic, or something, because most of the time Trump loves letting us know how tawdry he is. “You can grab them by the pussy” is the real Trump. His stupid little fist in the air, his stupid permanent scowl, his stupid blue suits and red ties, his stupid boasting about sexual assault – it’s all the same thing.
Until he wakes up and finds himself in front of a judge.
Is there any other kind?
Funnily enough, of course, the reason the explicit details were allowed in by the judge is because Trump is denying the affair happened at all. If he actually admitted it, then it’d be a fact, and not something the prosecution can give evidence about (since the tawdriness isn’t the source of the criminal charges). So once again, his inclination to grotesque behavior is only beaten by his inability to be honest about anything.
Until he wakes up and finds himself in front of a judge.
Wakes up? More like falls asleep
Running afoul of campaign finance laws I understand. What I don’t quite get is the ‘outcome of an election’ aspect.
Isn’t just about everything a political campaign does is meant to Influence the outcome of an election?
Well the report specifies “illegally influence” so I suppose one is allowed to influence the outcome of an election but not by, say, murdering the rival.