Prosecutors Had Two Final Words for the Trump Jury: Stormy Daniels

On Tuesday, Joshua Steinglass, a prosecutor from Manhattan, expressed his discomfort about the entire incident that took place in the suite.

Steinglass gave his final statement in the hush money trial involving Donald Trump, where he recounted the night in 2006 that porn star Stormy Daniels claimed she slept with the former president in a hotel room. Steinglass spoke informally, often referring to Trump's associates as "these guys," and summed up the prosecution's case in simple language.

According to Steinglass, Daniel's tale is quite complicated. It may cause uneasiness or discomfort when heard. It might even make some folks queasy to listen to. Nonetheless, this is precisely the objective.

Throughout the last five weeks, Trump's trial has largely revolved around numerous documents and phone records. The prior president has pleaded innocent to 34 allegations of fraudulently altering business records to mask a payment made to Daniels in exchange for her secrecy, and dismissed any allegations of an affair with her. In Todd Blanche's final argument, he remarked that the case was focused on written evidence. However, according to Steinglass, there was a cohesive storyline present.

He informed the jury that the driving force behind the incident was Stormy Daniels.

Before the 2016 election, there was a big issue. A tape had been released where Trump talked about grabbing women inappropriately. This caused a lot of problems for the Republican nominee's campaign. Then, it came out that Trump had paid Daniels some money. The prosecutor said that this was an attempt to influence the election. Some might wonder if it really matters if Trump had a relationship with a porn star a decade ago. According to Steinglass, the voters have the right to decide if it's important to them.

In summary, Blanche tried to discredit Michael Cohen, who was previously employed as a fixer by President Trump and had arranged the payment to Daniels. Steinglass did not defend Cohen's honesty but shared an emotional account of his actions. Steinglass acknowledged that Cohen had negative feelings towards his former boss after serving time in prison related to the payment, but emphasized that Cohen had been an important member of the defendant's team. However, when problems arose, the defendant quickly abandoned Cohen and publicly insulted him.

Steinglass appeared to be very surprised by the situation he was discussing about "the Trump phenomenon". He might have even found it a little funny to be sharing it on such a serious platform. According to him, Cohen is understandably upset that he is the only one being held responsible for his part in this plot so far.

Steinglass stated that although Cohen had been dishonest before, he did it to benefit Trump. It was Trump who hired him knowing that he was willing to be deceitful for his benefit. Steinglass then questioned why Cohen would only lie during his testimony and not go all the way by claiming that Trump had revealed to him that he slept with Daniels in secret.

Blanche gazed at Steinglass while Trump kept his eyes forward. Trump's family members that were present - Don Jr., Eric, and Tiffany - looked at their smartphones. Steinglass's comments were going to last for a while, and Tiffany left the courtroom at a 5 p.m. intermission, exchanging a wordless greeting with Andrew Giuliani, who has been consistently present during the trial.

At this point in the larger story involving Trump, Daniels, and Cohen, which started in 2016 and became public in 2018, the details about this interesting group of people have been revealed many times over. During Steinglass's six-hour speech, he seemed to be trying to refocus attention on the case. Journalists often use slightly vague terms to describe Daniels's profession, such as "adult film star" or "adult entertainer," but Steinglass chose to use the more direct and memorable pairing of "porn star" and "president." This was an effort to remind the jury, who will start deliberating on Wednesday after over a month of reviewing documents in the court, that the reason for this case can be traced back to a single night in Lake Tahoe 18 years ago.