Donald Trump’s lawyers ‘surprised’ Judge Merchan during the trial

Judge Juan Merchan was “surprised” that former President Donald Trump’s lawyers did not do more to block adult film actress Stormy Daniels’ damning testimony in the criminal trial.

Daniels, who claimed to have received a $130,000 hush money payment from former Trump fixer Michael Cohen, revealed intimate details about her sexual encounter with Trump that upset the defense.

Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying company records in connection with the payment to Daniels. He has pleaded not guilty and denied her allegations.

The defense specifically took issue with her saying they didn’t use a condom, that there was a bodyguard outside the room, that there was “a balance of power” between the two and that she “blacked out” even though that so. consensual sex. Blanche also complained that she discussed future encounters with Trump that did not result in alleged sex.

After the lunch break, Trump attorney Todd Blanche announced that the defense had filed a motion to dismiss based on Daniels’ testimony, arguing that it was “the kind of testimony that makes it impossible to come back from.” Merchan agreed with Blanche that “some things were better left unsaid” but noted that Daniels was “a little hard to control” and ultimately denied the motion.

The judge then went further, telling the defense that he was “surprised there weren’t more objections” from their side of the courtroom. He noted that even he intervened at one point and raised his own objection.

“When you say the bell has rung, the defense has to take some responsibility for that,” Merchan said.

During the defense’s arguments, Blanche told Merchan, “We have objected to the best of our ability” and noted that the judge had helped cut Daniels off “several times” but that “we unfortunately believe that there should be a mistrial come.” The attorney added that if a mistrial were to occur and a new trial was declared, Daniels’ testimony would have to be excluded entirely, or at least limited.

But Merchan disagreed, telling Blanche that the “remedy” for the defense would be “a cross-examination.”

Susan Necheles, another attorney representing Trump, tried to push back, arguing that the defense had previously challenged Daniels as a witness but that the judge had allowed her testimony to be entered into the record as evidence.

Merchan quickly shut her down, telling Necheles, “That’s not right. If you’re going to say something like that, be accurate.”

Trump’s lawyer argued that these points had “nothing to do with the case” and that they were “extremely prejudicial.” He also accused the prosecutor of asking the questions to embarrass Trump and “inflame the jury.”

However, Assistant District Attorney Susan Hoffinger argued that Daniels’ account was “not new” and that the prosecutor did not bring up any new details that the witness had since recalled.

“We were very careful not to provoke too much,” she said.

She then argued that Daniels’ testimony directly addressed the credibility of the witness, who the defense attacked, and that “this is ultimately what the defendant was trying to hide in terms of the payout.”

“This is an exhibition if you will,” Hoffinger said of Daniels’ testimony.