CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 07, 2024 11:38 AM UTC

Trump Hush Money Trial: A Family Show No More

  • by: Colorado Pols

The Washington Post has live updates from the ongoing criminal trial of former President Donald Trump today, on charges of falsifying business records to conceal a “hush money” payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in order to cover up an affair that the former President insists to this day never took place.

Well gentle readers, today Ms. Daniels took to the witness stand to set that record straight.

Stormy Daniels, the adult-film actress who claims she had a sexual encounter with Donald Trump years before he sought the presidency, took the stand Tuesday in his criminal trial. Trump faces 34 counts of falsifying business records related to his reimbursement of his former lawyer Michael Cohen for a hush money payment made to Daniels shortly before the 2016 election, which was meant to keep her from publicly sharing her story.

Over objections from defense lawyers, Daniels testified about meeting Trump during a golf tournament in 2006, then gave a detailed description of what she alleged was their sexual encounter in a Lake Tahoe hotel room.

For those explicit details, you can read the WaPo’s play-by-play or many other accounts. The briefest and most sanitary version we’ll pass along is that although Ms. Daniels says she wasn’t threatened and didn’t resist she was not happy to have been put in this unexpected situation–and as she has colorfully described in the past, Trump’s performance wasn’t great by any let alone porn star standards.

Daniels’ confirmation in detail that the alleged affair did take place is another step for prosecutors in establishing Trump’s motive for not just the payment to Daniels, which is though morally problematic not a crime, but the concealment of the payment through accounting tricks–which is the crime on trial. We’re not sure how many faithful MAGA followers really believed Trump’s denials of his affairs, and plenty of Trump supporters will happily tell you they couldn’t care less if Trump is lying about it.

But some number of Republicans will be troubled by being lied to. And some others by the alleged crime committed in covering it up.

For everyone else, it’s the hedonism, the lies, and the life of crime we already know Trump proudly leads.


10 thoughts on “Trump Hush Money Trial: A Family Show No More

  1. Did Stormy jump the shark?

    According to Maggie Haberman and her colleagues at the NY Times – the link to which I will not attach since it is behind a paywall – the judge has been admonishing Ms. Daniels to answer just the question asked and not go off on tangents.

    Daniels is the first witness for whom the jurors have avoided making eye contact. (My comment:  it may be simply because her line of work makes them uncomfortable. Or they don't like her as a witness. We'll know after the trial concludes.)

    I got the impression from the published accounts that Daniels has embellished on her former account of what happened and may be suggesting that she was a victim. If so, this may blow up in Alvin Bragg's face. (Did they even prep her to testify?)

    She claimed to be "traumatized" by the encounter. (My comment:  given her prior statements about the size and shape of Trump's junk, I would think "bored" and "disappointed" would be more apt adjectives.) She said she did not say "no," but she did not say, "yes," either. She also talked about the imbalance in the power dynamic, so you see where this is going. 

    For her to imply that she is a victim by her walking into the hotel room of a rich, horny old man with a reputation for trying to bed celebrities is a stretch too far. There are genuine victims of sexual violence. She does a grave dissservice to those women and men who have been on the receiving end of abuse.

    PS While Melania may not be in the courtroom “standing by her man,” her stepson, Eric the Dim, is seated in the spectators’ gallery staring blankly – which of course, is his natural state.

    1. The dim one just shared some thoughts about today's Drumpf circus: Apparenrly the dim one hasn't been paying any attention to the court proceedings prior to this posting  

      No one believes that on the eve of an election, a former President of the United States & the Current Frontrunner, is being tried for 34 felonies (based on a bookkeeping entry, booked by a person who never spoke with the President and sat in New York while he was in the Oval Office 240 miles away in Washington DC), for booking an legal invoice as a “Legal Expense” in a PERSONAL bank account general ledger nearly 8 years ago. 

      This is a show trial with the sole intent to embarrass and prevent the frontrunners ability to campaign.

    2. The prosecution needed to confine its direct more than it did and better control Daniels.  The defense got several objections rightfully sustained, though based on accounts I've heard they should've objected more.  The motion for mistrial was unsurprising, as the defense had to make the motion now to preserve it for appeal.  The prosecution made a mistake in getting into too much detail on Daniels' encounters with trump, and has now created an issue for appeal that it could have avoided.  

    3. So not a "legitimate" rape, in your expert opinion. But guess what? People knowingly involved in situaions where consensual sex may be a possibility can still be pushed into "unwelcome" or premature sexual encounters, which is one form of sexual assault.  So spouses, dates, escorts, prostitutes and porn actresses can be sexually assaulted. And yes, they are victims. 

      Kevin Spacey, the actor whose work as Frank Underwood so impressed you that you took on that alias for a while, was just exonerated of 10+ counts of sexual assault from various men. ( He wasn't innocent of the charges, but his lawyers screwed up, apparently.) Spacey's victims consented to be alone and drunk with a "rich , horny old man"reputed to take advantage of drunk acquaintances . Like Stormy, they thought they were befriending someone who would mentor them or help their careers.  Anthony Rapp was a 14 year old Broadway actor when Spacey assaulted him. 

      So I'm sure that you are equally skeptical of these males' claims of victimhood and assault.. 

      1. No, this was not a rape, Kiwi. It wasn't even sexual harassment.

        The accuser's story must still face the test of veracity. Which this one does not.

        The fact that her story has evolved over the years is evidence that it is not credible. Let me guess; you have a nice explanation for that:  repressed memory, Pomps?

         As the trial judge said today – in an incredible understatement – Ms. Daniels' has some credibility problems.

        But not in the eyes of you, La Pomposa, Queen of the Cuture of Collective Victimization.

        And not only "her truth" (a phrase you are fond of, not me … I think "truth" should be something objective) continued to evolve but why the delayed outcry. Eighteen years is eighteen years of living with this trauma. Jean Carroll, in contrast, did tell people in her life. 

        If one claims to have been sexually abused or victimized, by God it must be true in each and every case, and all women collectively share in that victimization.

        You scream about demanding justice. In fact, your screwball squad members are aligned with a group called Justice Democrats. Maybe we should try letting INDIVIDUALS go to the police (you know, the guys and gals you want to defund), report sex crimes, go into court, tell their side of what happened, and let the fact finder decide each case on ITS individual merits or lack thereof.

        So far, based on her ever-evolving tale, this woman – who literally has made a career in the sex industry and wanted to be on the Apprentice – has told a story of subtle coercion that has no legs.

        Did she engage in some type of sexual activity with that lecherous pig? I believe that part of her story. Was it consensual? Yes.

        My prediction for the outcome of this case: a majority for conviction but probably not unanimous, and therefore, a mistrial.

        Trump will claim – falsely – that he’s been exoneration. And he’ll see a slight bump in his polling numbers, especially in those rust belt states, and big haul of cash from fundraising off this.

        Alvin Bragg will announce that he will retry the case next year, especially if it’s eleven to one (or ten to two).

        And a lot of people will say – WTF – we wasted how many weeks on this thing while the serious crimes (the DC, the Atlanta case, and the Florida case) slowly disappear.

        1. Amidst all your name calling, insults, bad mind reading, and hyperbole, you neglected to answer my question: 

          Would you be equally skeptical of the assault claims made by Kevin Spacey's victims? They were mostly drunk, alone with Spacey in his rooms, expecting career help from association with the famed actor. They were mostly aware of Spacey's reputation. Some of their stories have "evolved".

          Are they, in your so-  expert judgement on rapey behavior, not real victims of real assaults?

          1. Once again, you change the subject and overreach, Kiwi, by comparing an adult woman seeking a role on a "reality TV show" and walking into the hotel room of a man who was know to be a leacherous pig with the alleged rape of a 14-year old boy.

            As for the details of the Kevin Spacey criminal case, I did not follow them closely because I have a full-time job, I go to work, I pay my bills, I pay my taxes, and I have a life. I do vaguely remember the criminal case against Spacey on Cape Cod was dropped, was it not? Wasn't that the case involving Rapp's claims? 

            I do remember seeing Spacey's creepy Christmas video. But that was on TV. And I will agree with you that he definitely was creepy. What happened to his case in the UK since you obviously have the free time to follow him?  

            You said something about him not being innocent "but his lawyers screwed up." Usually when the defendant's lawyer screws up, the case does not go well for the defendant. When the prosecutor screws up, the case may go well for the defendant. Think Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden in the OJ Simpson case.

            But you are saying Spacey walked after his lawyer screwed up? Back to my point. What does that have to do with whether Stormy Daniels was sexually abused by Donald Trump?

  2. For the few minutes I can stand to watch Fox “News” – they ARE covering Stormy’s testimony today, and have noted that the defense asked for a mistrial but were denied. How will MAGA’s tender ears handle all this?! 

    1. I'm not surprised FOX is covering it. This is probably the only part they will cover.

      Murdoch knows that sex sells (Exhibit A:  Page Six of his flagship newspaper, the NY Post; Exhibit B: the blond bimboes Murdoch has along with the distinguished older gentlemen who present the "news" at Fox). And if they must say something about Trump's trial, they should stick to the mantra that this is only about alleged sex between a man with a lot of (cough, cough) sex appeal and a woman who works in the adult film industry.

      Of course, the party line is still that it is only alleged sex, Trump denied, YADDA YADDA YADDA, witch hunt, fake news, Russia hoax, her emails, his birth certificate and all the other buzz words that drive Ruppert Murdoch's dogs to start licking themselves when they hear the bell ring on Fox.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

52 readers online now


Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!