Skip to main content
We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here.

Stormy Daniels Implodes Under Cross-Examination

As the hush money trial for President Trump continues, many people are starting to wonder why this is even going on at this point.

While the state felt like they had the smoking gun with Stormy Daniels, the cross examination by the defense proved otherwise.

Daniels is the epitome of a walking contradiction, she will say one thing, but her actions tell another story.

Fox News expands on a few of the “star witness” contradictions:

Daniels insisted that she always told the truth. Yet, she admitted that her two signed statements denying an affair with Trump were untrue. She declared that she wasn’t interested in making money. Yet, she demanded cash. She claimed that she wanted her Trump narrative to be made public. Yet, she eagerly sold herself to remain silent.

Daniels’ story seemed to change dramatically depending on the audience and/or her motives for personal gain.

Enmity aside, Daniels’ shameless greed appears to have defined her every action. The defense introduced evidence that painted her as a shakedown artist. As Trump was running for president in 2016, she capitalized on her brief encounter with him 10 years earlier by squeezing him for money under escalating threats.

Truthfully, President Trump should have been able to pursue a criminal case of extortion as opposed to surrendering to Daniel’s blackmail scheme.

A solid witness should not have their own agenda, but Daniels had a clear vendetta against President Trump – simply looking to hurt the President rather than telling the truth.

Why she was ever called as a witness in this case is questionable as she herself admits she didn’t have access to the bookkeeping decisions or anything about the actual indictment.

Fox News adds how Daniels not only made herself a ridiculous witness, but actually helped President Trump’s case:

Under questioning, Daniels acknowledged that the agreement she signed was a legal matter being handled in a legal contract.  That simple statement supports Trump’s defense argument that the accord negotiated with Daniels was properly labeled as “legal expenses,” because that is what they were. This was previously corroborated by the accountant who actually entered it that way in the Trump Organization ledger.

Many people have taken to X to voice their opinions of Daniels after the cross examination:

Each day the trial goes on, it is more and more promising of the law siding with President Trump.


Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

Leave a comment
Thanks for sharing!