Damning evidence in Trump trial could be gleaned from previous Stormy Daniels lawsuit: report
Former top prosecutor and law school professor Andrew Weissmann pointed to another case in which Donald Trump gave a deposition confessing to reimbursing hush money payments paid to cover up an affair — and argued it could be damning evidence in his latest trial.
Trump sat in a New York courtroom for the 13th day of trial Tuesday, accused of creating false business records to hide the payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels. He has pleaded not guilty to 34 charges.
Among the things that the prosecutors have "hinted at," said Weissmann, is a previous case in California in which Daniels successfully sued to be released from her non-disclosure agreement with Trump.
She had agreed to keep quiet about the affair for a $130,000 payment.
ALSO READ: Trump’s Manhattan trial could determine whether rule of law survives: criminologist
Trump's lawyer on Tuesday asked Daniels on the stand in the current trial about a number of interviews in which she refused to give comment or denied the hush money. Daniels said she was unable to speak because she was respecting the non-disclosure agreement.
Weissmann told MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace that the California case might be brought up because it is essential to this one.
Daniels testified that there was no interest in her story before the "Access Hollywood" tape was released, and then everyone was interested, Weissmann pointed out.
"All the efforts to dirty it up, saying she's a liar, and the story changed, is belied to where she enters an NDA and lives by it," Weissmann explained. "What's fascinating, and I'll be interested to see if it comes out on redirect, she lives by it, and ultimately, when this story is released and says this is what happens, she doesn't just go out and talk about it."
He recalls that Daniels brought a lawsuit in California, saying that she shouldn't have to abide by the NDA anymore, and she won the case.
"And you know what happens in that lawsuit that is relevant to this case?" Weissmann continues. "Donald Trump submits a brief where he says over and over again, I reimbursed Michael Cohen for the hush money payments."
Wallace asked if that was evidence they'd bring up in this trial.
"It's not yet. They have put in different evidence where he has said that, but it is — he has tweeted it. There's a brief on it!" said Weissmann.
He pointed out that one of Trump's lawyers' biggest mistakes was promising in their opening statements that they would prove Trump did not reimburse Cohen.
See his full commentary in the video below or at the link here.
Leave a Comment
Related Post