Storm Front

Last week, for better or worse, the Stormy Daniels testimony dominated the news. From what I read in the transcripts, Stormy put forth a compelling story and breezily swatted away the Defense Counsel’s many attempts to brand her as a greedy and vengeful liar.

After the first day of testimony, I started jotting down notes for this post, but by the end of the second day, the notes were rendered irrelevant.

The original angle was that her testimony was mostly unnecessary; everything she said in court was already in the public record by way of her 2018 book, “Full Disclosure.” I ordered it (from a discount book website) a couple years ago and read it in about a day or two.

“Your Honor, I’d like to admit this document as Exhibit 1.”

But by the second day, TFG’s defense attorney was trying to infer that because there were facts she told the book that she didn’t mention in other interviews, or in court, and the other way around, the story had to be a lie.

This is a ridiculous assertion when you think about it. I mean, just from a storyteller’s perspective, when you tell a story multiple times, you rarely tell it the same way twice.

First, you have to consider your audience. Not every fact about the story is necessary, so you include the ones that are crucial to the structure, advance the story, or are the most interesting and entertaining. A different audience (like an interview in a fluff magazine versus court testimony) requires a different eye for details.

Further, the more you tell a story, the more you self-edit, keeping the material that works and discarding things that didn’t or were found to be unnecessary. But that doesn’t necessarily change the truth of your story (unless you’re changing critical details, like who you slept with or where it happened, which was not an issue here.)

So the defense is claiming that (and this is a made-up example) “because you said the bedspread was blue in the interview and you didn’t mention a bedspread during our testimony, you must be lying.”

Verbal flimflammery like this is what they have to rely on because they can’t defend the truth. It’s the nature of legal defense to throw a bunch of crap at the wall to see what sticks, as well as the nature of Republicans to use misdirection and logical fallacy when they can’t support (or refute) an inconvenient fact.

And as far as that goes, TFG’s legal team also suggested that because the witness is a porn star, she cannot be trusted to tell the truth.

It really IS like the 1920s again on the right side of the aisle. Such an assertion is so off-base it’s like inferring that eliminating child marriage promotes abortion. And who would ever say… Wait a minute…

Everything leads back to abortion with these guys… women voting, having jobs, getting an education, even pockets in women’s clothes, it all leads to more abortions and must be stopped, according to the religious wingnuts currently running loose in the Republican party.

But I digress…

It’s all so silly because if competent, unrestricted attorneys were running the defense, Stormy would never have had to tell the story on the stand. The crime is in how the payments were made, not that there WERE payments. So whether he had extra-marital porn star sex or not would not be relevant. But because he complained that it never happened, it opened the door for the prosecution to show that it did, and hence, we have the salacious testimony out in public that he was so desperate to squelch.

TFG is also chaffing under the bond of his gag order, which prevents him from attacking witnesses, jurors, and court personnel. It’s like, when you take away his ability to smear people, you’ve cut Samson’s hair and silenced the jawbone of an ass. He has no other weapons if he can’t threaten and malign. When do you ever hear him attack an argument? It’s always a personal attack on an opponent. The guy hasn’t left the playground in 70 years.

The obvious solution, if he’s upset about how mean old Stormy is talking about him in court, is to take the stand himself and smear away. But I’m sure his attorneys will tie him to the chair before they allow him to testify. They could have a perjury counter, right there in the courtroom, and it would be lighting up like a pinball machine until smoke would pour out.

Former Fix-it lawyer Michael Cohen is testifying today, which I’m sure will send TFG into apoplectic fits. This is a guy who knows where the metaphorical bodies are buried. The Defendant also complained about Cohen’s tweets about him last week, again asserting that he can’t defend himself. In a rare show of decency for anyone involved in this fiasco, Cohen agreed to stop tweeting about him until after he testifies and once again becomes fair, non-gag-able, game.

I’m sure we’ll get plenty of this sort of thing over the next few days:

Lawyer told to lie for defendant.

Lawyer lies for defendant.

Lawyer gets caught, does time, flips on defendant.

Defendant says, “Hey, how can you believe a convict and a liar.”

However much a shit-show this case is, at least there’s a trial happening. It doesn’t look like any of the others are going to be adjudicated any time soon. That’s another Republican truism… when you can’t win on facts, attack the process. Work the system. Call in favors from judges you placed there and the reason for that placement.

This may be the only case to see the inside of a courtroom, so I hope they get it right.

 On the lighter side, it looks like the Fox “News” sycophants are getting their post-conviction stories lined up:

Thanks C&L.

I almost spit my drink. Someone seriously thinks TFG is coming out of prison with muscle bod? Please tell Jesse Watters that it’s not the prison that gives you the bod, it’s the hard physical work you do while inside. Can anyone even picture this doughboy working out? Or lifting anything heavier than a Big Mac? Spare me. If anything, he’ll come out of prison looking like a cross between Golum and Jabba the Hutt.