Former President Donald J. Trump is on trial in New York for falsifying business records related to a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.
Judge Juan Merchan denied a mistrial request and gag order modification in the trial.
Stormy Daniels testified in court on May 9, 2024, and faced combative cross-examination from Trump's lawyers about her porn industry work.
Trump's lawyers accused Daniels of making up the story of having sex with Trump and questioned her credibility.
In a dramatic turn of events, the trial of former President Donald J. Trump continues to unfold in New York. Trump is accused of falsifying business records related to a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. Daniels took to social media with a comment about Trump not testifying in court.
On May 9, 2024, Stormy Daniels testified in court and faced cross-examination from Trump's lawyers. Susan Necheles, a lawyer defending Trump, questioned Daniels about her porn industry work during cross-examination. This led to a combative response from Daniels who insisted her story was true despite minor inconsistencies in previous interviews.
Necheles suggested that Daniels had employed skills as a porn writer in making up the story and accused her of making money off it. Trump's lawyers also attacked the credibility of Stormy Daniels, accusing her of making up the story of having sex with Trump.
Judge Juan Merchan denied a mistrial request from Todd Blanche, Trump's attorney, and also denied a gag order modification. Trump criticized the judge's decisions in front of reporters. Susan Necheles is representing Trump alongside Todd Blanche in the trial.
Stormy Daniels signed a nondisclosure agreement with Michael Cohen for $130,000 not to go public with her case. The trial continues as new evidence and testimonies are presented in court.
Stormy Daniels testified in Donald Trump's criminal trial on Thursday.
Trump's attorney Todd Blanche requested a mistrial due to Daniels changing her story and irrelevant testimony.
Judge Juan Merchan denied the mistrial request and gag order modification.
Trump criticized the judge's decisions in front of reporters.
Daniels took to social media with a comment about Trump not testifying in court.
Accuracy
Stormy Daniels testified in court.
Trump's lawyers attacked the credibility of Stormy Daniels during her testimony and accused her of making up the story.
Susan Necheles suggested Daniels had employed skills as a porn writer in making up the story and accused her of making money off it.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(95%)
The author does not make any explicit fallacious statements in the article. However, Trump's attorney Susan Necheles makes an informal fallacy by implying that Daniels' work in the porn industry undermines her testimony. This is an ad hominem attack and a false dilemma as it does not address the validity of Daniels' testimony but rather attacks her character.
Trump attorney Susan Necheles: “You have a lot of experience making phony stories about sex.”
Bias
(80%)
The author does not demonstrate any overt bias in the article. However, the author does include a quote from Trump's attorney Susan Necheles where she implies that Stormy Daniels has experience making 'phony stories about sex'. This could be seen as an attempt to discredit Daniels based on her profession in the adult film industry. While this is not an egregious example of bias, it does suggest a potential bias against Daniels and her testimony due to her occupation.
If that story was untrue, I would’ve written it to be a lot better.
You have a lot of experience making phony stories about sex.
Former President Donald Trump observed the testimony of Madeleine Westerhout, a former White House employee, in the Trump hush money trial on May 9.
Trump’s lawyers attacked the credibility of Stormy Daniels during her testimony and accused her of making up the story of having sex with Trump.
Daniels combatively responded to questions from Trump’s attorney Susan Necheles, insisting her story was true despite minor inconsistencies in previous interviews.
Necheles suggested Daniels had employed skills as a porn writer in making up the story and accused her of making money off it.
Accuracy
Trump's lawyers attacked the credibility of Stormy Daniels during her testimony and accused her of making up the story of having sex with Trump.
Susan Necheles questioned Daniels about her porn industry work during cross-examination.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The authors make several implicit assumptions and use inflammatory rhetoric in their reporting. They insinuate that Stormy Daniels is lying about having sex with Donald Trump by implying that she makes up stories about sex for a living and is only making money off of this allegation. This is an appeal to morality fallacy, as they are attempting to discredit Daniels' character rather than addressing the evidence presented in the trial. They also use inflammatory language such as 'phony stories' and 'making up the story'. Additionally, they report on conflicting accounts of Daniels' financial situation without explicitly stating which side is making these claims or providing evidence for their assertions.
New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan scolded Donald Trump’s attorney Susan Necheles for not objecting in real time to Stormy Daniels’ detailed testimony.
Stormy Daniels testified in court about her alleged sexual encounter with former President Donald Trump in 2006.
Daniels signed a nondisclosure agreement with Michael Cohen for $130,000 not to go public with her case.
Accuracy
]Stormy Daniels testified in court about her alleged sexual encounter with former President Donald Trump in 2006.[
Adult film star Stormy Daniels testified in court about her alleged sexual encounter with former President Donald Trump in 2006.
Former President Donald Trump observed the testimony of Madeleine Westerhout, a former White House employee, in the Trump hush money trial on May 9.
Deception
(30%)
The article contains explicit and salacious details of Stormy Daniels' alleged sexual encounter with Donald Trump. While these details may be true, they are irrelevant to the case at hand which is about falsifying business records. The inclusion of such details is an attempt to sensationalize the story and manipulate emotions, making it a form of deception.
She also told jurors about when she ‘spanked’ Trump ‘right on the butt’ with a copy of one of his magazines.
CNN – Adult film star Stormy Daniels dished out salacious details of her alleged sexual encounter with former President Donald Trump in 2006 from the witness stand on Tuesday, describing how they met at a celebrity golf tournament and what she says happened when she went to Trump’s Lake Tahoe hotel room.
Daniels described what was in Trump’s hotel room, including the black-and-white tile floor and the big mahogany table in the center of the foyer. She described the dinner conversation – she was impressed Trump asked about the business of the adult film industry, not just the sex.
Fallacies
(85%)
The authors of the article use inflammatory rhetoric by describing Stormy Daniels' testimony as 'salacious details' and 'explicit'. They also make a dichotomous depiction by contrasting Daniels' detailed account with the judge's caution to avoid unnecessary detail. However, these fallacies do not significantly impact the article as a whole and do not detract from the reporting of facts.
]The testimony was 'so lengthy and detailed that Merchan cautioned Daniels on multiple occasions to slow down and listen to the questions and answer them briefly.'[]The authors describe Daniels' testimony as 'salacious details' which is an inflammatory term.[]Merchan ultimately denied the mistrial motion but said he felt Daniels was a difficult witness to control. The defense has to take some responsibility for that.' This statement implies that Daniels is difficult because of her explicit testimony, which is a dichotomous depiction as it suggests that detail and accuracy are negative qualities.
]The prosecution, which has no case, has gone too far. MISTRIAL![]Trump signaled his lawyers' strategy during the lunch break by posting on Truth Social: 'THE PROSECUTION, WHICH HAS NO CASE, HAS GONE TOO FAR. MISTRIAL!' This statement is an appeal to authority as it implies that Trump's opinion holds weight in the case despite not being a legal expert or involved in the trial.
Bias
(80%)
The authors use salacious language to describe Stormy Daniels' testimony about her encounter with Donald Trump in a way that may be intended to elicit an emotional response from readers. They also describe the details of the encounter in explicit terms, which may be unnecessary for reporting on the trial itself.
At first I was just startled, like a jump scare. I wasn’t expecting someone to be there, especially minus a lot of clothing.
Daniels dished out salacious details of her alleged sexual encounter with former President Donald Trump in 2006 from the witness stand on Tuesday, describing how they met at a celebrity golf tournament and what she says happened when she went to Trump’s Lake Tahoe hotel room.
Daniels gave short, terse answers to many of her questions, defiantly responding false and no while disputing Necheles’ assertions that she had made up details in her story or that she was trying to extort Trump.
Daniels then said that after she went to the bathroom, she emerged to find Trump on the hotel bed in his boxers and a T-shirt.
She also explained how she was not truthful when she denied that she had an affair with Trump in statements released in 2018 after the hush money payment became public. She says she signed a statement before going on Jimmy Kimmel Live in a way she’s never signed her name before as a tip off to the late-night talk show host.
She described the dinner conversation – she was impressed Trump asked about the business of the adult film industry, not just the sex.
Trump attorney Necheles didn’t take long to challenge Daniels’ story in cross-examination, accusing the adult film actress of hating Trump.
