Adult film star Stormy Daniels' seven hours of testimony in Donald Trump's hush money/falsified business records trial concluded on Thursday, May 9. During her testimony, the adult film star detailed a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 and the hush money payments made to her a decade later.
Trump defense attorney Susan R. Necheles tried to discredit Daniels' testimony, but MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin has stressed that the adult film star "really held her ground" on cross examination.
Harry Litman, a law professor at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles (UCLA), has had a lot to say about Daniels' testimony on X, formerly Twitter. And he believes that Trump's own defense team has acknowledged some of the main points in the prosecution being conducted by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr.'s office.
READ MORE: Jurors were suppressing laughter as Stormy Daniels slammed Trump at trial: George Conway
Trump's lawyers, according to Litman, have admitted in court that Trump "reimbursed" Michael Cohen — his former personal attorney and fixer and one of the star witnesses in Bragg's case — for hush money payments to Daniels.
Litman tweeted, "While it slipped by almost without notice, the admission of Trump's admission in the civil suit with Stormy that he reimbursed Michael Cohen for the money Cohen paid…. (was) huge in the overall scheme of the case. Proof is now (former Trump Organization CFO Allan) Weisselberg and Cohen formulated details (which had to be w/ his knowledge and approval) and he reimbursed."
Litman also tweeted, "Both sides had good moments, but more for the DA, while Trump and Trump's lawyers had some atrocious moments."
According to Litman, Necheles' cross examination of Daniels was "ineffective."
READ MORE: Trump lawyer immediately shut down as she curses in Stormy Daniels question
The UCLA law professor tweeted that "overall," Daniels "seemed more in control of the dynamic than Necheles," who, he tweeted, "was over aggressive and even offensive in spots, including her suggestion that a porn star could possibly be cowled by a 60-year-old billionaire."
READ MORE: 'Bizarre timeline': Columnist laments 'political madness' of Stormy Daniels’ lurid testimony
