BREAKING! Trump’s Attorneys File Motion For Mistrial After Stormy Daniels Takes the Stand

Gateway Pundit ^ | May 9, 2024 | Cristina Laila

[Macho MAGA Man]

Trump’s attorneys filed a motion for mistrial on Thursday after Stormy Daniels took the witness stand.

Stormy Daniels took the witness stand again Thursday in Alvin Bragg’s lawfare ‘hush money’ trial against Trump in New York City.

..... Snip.....

Trump’s attorneys on Tuesday moved for a mistrial over Stormy Daniels’ testimony, but the crooked judge rejected it.

“What’s the jury to do with that? It’s still extraordinarily prejudicial to insert safety — safety concerns into a trial about business records. There’s no way to unring the bell in our view,” Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche argued.

“As a threshold matter, Mr. Blanche, I agree that there were things that would have been better left unsaid. I think the witness was a little difficult to control,” Judge Merchan said, according to ABC News.

[erkelly]

Unless Trump is prevented from taking office after he wins, marchan has made himself a powerful enemy.

[Regulator]

Blanche should demand to show some of Stormy’s films to let the jury know what a helpless victim she is.

[pepsi_junkie]

Its how they rolled with Russia-gate, with Covid, with Ukraine, with the economy.

I feel for them, really. It must be a burden to be so evil that you can never tell people what you really want or they'd hate you.

[Political Junkie Too]

Perhaps the Trump hating jurors will be satisfied that his reputation has been smeared even more, but can't find the needed elements of a crime. Then again, we won't know until they come back with a verdict.

I've been wondering all along...

The LAAP-dog media made a lot of noise about two lawyers being on the jury and how they may become "super jurors" because of their knowledge of the law. The thought was that the other jurors would defer to the lawyers in a sort of "The Runaway Jury" situation.

That said, if it is clear that there is no case here, that the law was misapplied, that Bragg failed to meet the threshold of proving his case, that there is no underlying crime that that bootstrapped the expired misdemeanors, that the legal expenses were properly booked as legals expenses, and that President Trump was not personally involved in the low-level day-to-day staff operations of their departments, and if these lawyers vote to convict President Trump anyway, can those two lawyers be brought up on ethics violations to the NY bar association? Aren't they still officers of the court? Don't they still have a duty to the law even though they are sitting on a jury?

-PJ

[logi_cal869]

“As a threshold matter, Mr. Blanche, I agree that there were things that would have been better left unsaid. I think the witness was a little difficult to control,” Judge Merchan said

Translated:

OUR money was more effective. /s

[Labyrinthos]

“Sounds like she was being coached.”

All witnesses are coached. Nothing illegal as long as the witness is honest when asked during direct or cross-examination.

[cableguymn]

cousin it??

[Vaduz]

I wager he has WH orders nothing changes he has to suck up to keep the job.

[Flaming Conservative]

He wanted the jury (and the public) to hear it. Even if he instructs the jury to disregard it, you can’t get the milk back into the cow. (I know your question was rhetorical, but I answered it anyway).

[kiryandil]

Blanche should demand to show some of Stormy’s films to let the jury know what a helpless victim she is.

See how those three guys are oppressing poor Spermy!

[kiryandil]

He wanted the jury (and the public) to hear it.

cartel stooge Wetback Cur

Pinochet would have known what to do with him and his daughter.

[lepton]

The article leaves off the Merchan comment which follows which is particularly outrageous: After over-ruling defense objections to Stormy Daniels testifying at all (as irrelevant) and defining further objections that there is just no need for those kind of details, how she felt about it, as this “is a case about books and records”, Merchan chided the defense for not objecting more and claimed he hadn’t over-ruled their objections to various things coming in - despite clearly doing so.

[napscoordinator]

Trumps lawyers sat their enthralled by her tale. Didn’t object once. Because of trump’s lawyers incompetence, I’d reject a mistrial myself.

[kiryandil]

It's a darn shame that we don't have our local FR operative around to disagree with you and defend cartel "judge" Wetback Cur...   

[napscoordinator]

Guilty of having crappy lawyers. How can they sit there listening to crap and not object? I think trump has the worst lawyers.

[kiryandil]

You’re typing this one-handed while you’re re-watching Spermy Daniels’ testimony for the 15th time...

[kiryandil]

Have Trump’s lawyers spoiled your daily toobin?

[napscoordinator]

What drugs are you on? They make you nonsensical.

[napscoordinator]

Interesting. You fool. it’s not videotaped. You have to be the biggest liar on earth. God knows you are going to burn for eternity.

[lepton]

Trumps lawyers sat their enthralled by her tale. Didn’t object once. Because of trump’s lawyers incompetence, I’d reject a mistrial myself.

---

They objected to all of it - on several grounds and on several aspects - and were overruled, and objected to many details of it. They were specific as to the type of objectionable things that Daniels was likely to say. They objected and got the judge to declare ‘guardrails’ in instructions to the prosecution, on the testimony, which were generally not enforced.