Stormy Daniels Testifies in New York Trial Over Trump Hush Money Payments

New York City, New York United States of America
Daniels described their encounter at a golf outing and denied trying to extort money from Trump.
Former President Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels testified in a New York trial over hush money payments made during Trump's presidential campaign in 2016.
Judge Juan Merchan imposed a gag order on Trump, fining him $10,000 for violations.
The trial is ongoing.
Trump arrived at the courtroom wearing a marigold tie and defended the payments as legal expenses.
Stormy Daniels Testifies in New York Trial Over Trump Hush Money Payments

Former President Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels, a porn actor, found themselves at the center of a high-profile trial in New York City on May 7, 2024. The trial revolved around hush money payments made during Trump's presidential campaign in 2016 to keep Daniels from disclosing an alleged sexual encounter between them in 2006.

Stormy Daniels testified about the encounter at Manhattan Criminal Court, describing how they met at a golf outing sponsored by her adult film studio. She recounted their brief conversation and Trump's remark that she must be 'the smart one.' Daniels denied trying to extort money from Trump and insisted that she only wanted to get the story out.

Trump arrived at the courtroom wearing a marigold tie and dark suit, ignoring shouted questions from the press. He defended the payments as legal expenses during a press conference before entering the courtroom. Susan Necheles, an attorney for Trump, announced that Daniels would be called to testify in the trial.

Judge Juan Merchan imposed a gag order on Trump before the trial began, ordering him not to make or direct others to make public statements about witnesses, counsel in the case or court staff. The judge has fined Trump $10,000 for violating this order 10 times.

Trump's legal team has asked a New York appeals court to rule on their challenge to the gag order. Meanwhile, Trump compared the judges imposing the gag orders on him to 'thugs' and an 'attack on the Republican Party and our once great nation itself.' He vowed to make sacrifices, including going to jail, in defense of free speech.

The trial is ongoing.



Confidence

91%

Doubts
  • It is unclear if any evidence other than Daniels' testimony was presented in court.
  • The exact nature of the sexual encounter between Stormy Daniels and Donald Trump was not detailed in her testimony.

Sources

79%

  • Unique Points
    • Trump compared the judges imposing the gag orders on him to ‘thugs’ and an ‘attack on the Republican Party and our once great nation itself’
    • Trump said he would make the sacrifice of going to jail to defend free speech.
    • Patrick Henry, an American Founding Father, famously said ‘give me liberty or give me death’ during a speech before the Virginia Assembly in 1775.
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (30%)
    The author uses emotional manipulation by quoting Patrick Henry's 'give me liberty or give me death' statement to elicit an emotional response from the reader. The author also engages in selective reporting by only mentioning the potential penalty of jail time for Trump without providing context about why the gag order was imposed or what Trump is accused of. The author also makes a false implication that this is an attack on the Republican Party and 'our once great nation itself' when it is specifically related to a criminal trial.
    • Former President Donald Trump took to social media on Wednesday with an unequivocal claim that keeping and expressing his constitutional rights were of the utmost importance to him, despite any penalty he could face amid a gag order imposed by a New York judge.
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The author uses an appeal to authority fallacy by quoting Patrick Henry's 'give me liberty or give me death' statement without providing any context as to why it is relevant to the current situation. The author also makes a dichotomous depiction by implying that either one has freedom or is in jail, ignoring the possibility of other options.
    • "Give me liberty or give me death,"
    • This Fascist mindset is all coming from D.C.
  • Bias (80%)
    The author expresses a clear bias towards Trump and against the judges involved in his case. He uses language that depicts the judges as 'thugs' and 'corrupt' without providing any evidence to support these assertions. The author also quotes Trump making a statement about being willing to go to jail for free speech, which is presented as a noble sacrifice, further demonstrating bias towards Trump.
    • Give me liberty or give me death.
      • I’ll do that sacrifice any day.
        • This Fascist mindset is all coming from D.C. It is a sophisticated hit job on Crooked Joe Biden’s Political Opponent, ME!
          • What these thugs are doing is an attack on the Republican Party, and our once great nation itself.
          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication

          95%

          • Unique Points
            • Donald Trump's legal team has asked a New York appeals court to rule on their challenge to the gag order limiting what the former president can say about witnesses in the criminal hush money trial.
            • Trump's lawyers filed an order to show cause Wednesday, which has been sealed.
            • Judge Juan Merchan has found Trump has violated the gag order 10 times and fined him $10,000 for public statements Trump made about certain witnesses and the jury.
          • Accuracy
            • Trump took to social media on Wednesday with an unequivocal claim that keeping and expressing his constitutional right to free speech was important to him despite any penalty he could face amid a gag order imposed by a New York judge.
            • Judge Merchan threatened Trump with jail time for continuing to violate the gag order.
          • Deception (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Fallacies (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Bias (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication

          100%

          • Unique Points
            • Stormy Daniels testified about a sexual encounter with Donald Trump in 2006 that resulted in her being paid to keep silent during the presidential race in 2016.
            • Donald Trump defended the payments to Cohen as legal expenses during a press conference before entering the courtroom.
            • Susan Necheles, an attorney for Trump, announced that Stormy Daniels would be the second witness called to testify in the trial.
            • Judge Juan Merchan imposed a gag order on Donald Trump before his criminal trial in New York began, ordering him not to make or direct others to make public statements about witnesses, counsel in the case or about court staff, the DA staff or family members of staff.
            • Stormy Daniels did not feel physically or verbally threatened during the encounter, but acknowledged an imbalance of power due to Trump's size and position.
          • Accuracy
            No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
          • Deception (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Fallacies (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Bias (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication

          76%

          • Unique Points
            • Stormy Daniels testified about a sexual encounter with Donald Trump in 2006 that resulted in her being paid to keep silent during the presidential race in 2016.
            • Stormy Daniels met Trump because her adult film studio sponsored one of the holes on the golf course. They had a brief conversation about the adult film industry and his remark that she must be 'the smart one'.
            • Daniels denied trying to extort money from Trump and insisted that she only wanted to get the story out.
          • Accuracy
            No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
          • Deception (30%)
            The article contains selective reporting as it only reports details that support the author's position. The author does not disclose any sources and focuses solely on Stormy Daniels' testimony at Trump's hush money trial. The article also uses emotional manipulation by describing the testimony as 'occasionally graphic', 'salacious details', and a 'spectacle'. Additionally, there are instances of sensationalism with phrases like 'historic firsts in a landmark case laden with claims of sex, payoffs and cover-ups' and 'the most-awaited spectacle'.
            • The testimony was by far the most-awaited spectacle in a trial that has toggled between tabloidesque elements and dry record-keeping details.
            • She told jurors how she met Trump because the adult film studio she worked for at the time sponsored one of the holes on the golf course.
            • Former President Donald Trump attends his trial at the Manhattan Criminal court, Monday, May 6, 2024, in New York. (Win McNamee/Pool Photo via AP)
            • She was expected to return to the witness stand Thursday, when the trial resumes.
            • Daniels veered into salacious details despite the repeated objections of defense lawyers, who demanded a mistrial over what they said were prejudicial and irrelevant comments.
            • Later, in an area known as the ‘gift room’, where celebrity golfers collected gift bags and swag, Trump remembered her as ‘the smart one’ and asked her to dinner, Daniels said.
          • Fallacies (85%)
            The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by describing the testimony as 'the most-awaited spectacle' and 'tabloid-esque elements'. The author also makes a dichotomous depiction of the trial being 'dry record-keeping details' versus the graphic testimony. However, these are not fallacies as they do not directly affect the author's arguments or assertions.
            • ]The most-awaited spectacle in a trial that has toggled between tabloid-esque elements and dry record-keeping details[
            • This is the kind of testimony that makes it impossible to come back from.
          • Bias (80%)
            The author of the article does not demonstrate any clear bias in their reporting. However, the article does contain several statements that could be perceived as having a slight pro-Daniels bias due to the detailed and graphic nature of her testimony being described. The author also describes Daniels as a 'vocal Trump antagonist' and mentions her criticism of Trump with mocking and pejorative jabs. These statements do not necessarily reflect bias on the part of the author, but they could be perceived as having a slight slant towards Daniels' perspective.
            • Daniels veered into salacious details despite the repeated objections of defense lawyers, who demanded a mistrial over what they said were prejudicial and irrelevant comments.
              • Daniels was expected to return to the witness stand Thursday, when the trial resumes.
                • She told jurors how she met Trump because the adult film studio she worked for at the time sponsored one of the holes on the golf course. She said they had a brief conversation when Trump’s group passed through, chatting about the adult film industry and her directing abilities. The celebrity real estate developer remarked that she must be ‘the smart one’ if she was making films, Daniels recalled.
                  • With Donald Trump sitting just feet away, Stormy Daniels testified Tuesday at the former president’s hush money trial about a sexual encounter the porn actor says they had in 2006 that resulted in her being paid to keep silent during the presidential race 10 years later.
                  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                    None Found At Time Of Publication
                  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                    None Found At Time Of Publication