Fuck Trump, but, still, why is any of this happening? Couldn't they just stipulate there was sex, as a business transaction, and move on to the actual legal case, which is about the cover-up?
They're establishing that her silence was a thing of value to his campaign. Her story is embarrassing to him, would have damaged him politically. Which supports the contention that the transaction was a campaign donation, thus making it a felony.
Yes, but the way I've seen it framed elsewhere is that Trump's theory of the case isn't harmed by stipulating the sex, and if he had, she'd have been excluded as a witness or in any event the bedroom stuff would be completely out. But now we get "he said I reminded him of Ivanka."
So it was the style/position of the sex specifically that was embarrassing for him, and not that it was extramarital, with a porn star, or that he paid for it?
1. Trump's lawyers never stipulate to anything, as a rule/stalling tactic.
2. Getting the embarrassing details in goes to the "this coming out would've hurt him in the election" element that gets you to a felony.
3. Jury trials are all about narrative. Gotta build a story-of-the-case in their mind.
It’s the explicit protocol of all Trump legal teams to never stipulate to anything. There was some discussion about all the custodial witnesses that Bragg is going to have to bring in.
