Trump attorney has testy exchange with Stormy Danielsβ ex-lawyer
Summary
TLDRThe cross-examination of Keith Davidson, former attorney for Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, is underway with Trump's attorney Emil Beauvais questioning Davidson's interactions with Michael Cohen and Donald Trump. Davidson confirms no direct interactions with Trump and testifies on Cohen's distress over not receiving a job in the Trump administration. The defense aims to portray Davidson as an opportunist, highlighting his negotiation tactics and past dealings with celebrities like Charlie Sheen and Lindsay Lohan. The strategy suggests an attempt to discredit Davidson's credibility and paint Trump as a victim of extortion and political persecution. The examination also touches on the timing of payments made to Daniels, suggesting they were influenced by the election's proximity rather than the affairs themselves.
Takeaways
- π Keith Davidson, the former attorney for Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, is being cross-examined by Trump's attorney, Emil Beauvais.
- π« Davidson confirmed to the jury that he has never had direct interactions with Donald Trump.
- π The court's focus is on a call between Davidson and Michael Cohen in December 2016, where Cohen's disappointment over not getting a job in the Trump administration is discussed.
- π£οΈ Davidson testified that Cohen was so distraught that he thought Cohen might harm himself, highlighting Cohen's instability.
- π Lanny Davis, presumably Cohen's counsel, suggests that Cohen's past actions will be judged on credibility by the jury.
- π€ Trump's attorney is insinuating that Davidson was cautious not to make payments to Daniels before the election to avoid the appearance of extortion.
- π° The line of questioning aims to establish whether Davidson was negotiating to avoid extortion while getting money from Michael Cohen for Stormy Daniels.
- π Davidson's credibility is being questioned as he repeatedly says he cannot recall certain events, which could affect the jury's perception of his testimony.
- π€ The defense is painting Davidson as an opportunist who profits from tabloid culture and targets vulnerable individuals for money.
- π Davidson's past work with other celebrities, such as Hulk Hogan and Lindsay Lohan, is being brought up to establish a pattern of behavior.
- π° The timing of the payments to Daniels and McDougal is crucial, with the defense arguing that the payments were made due to Davidson's opportunistic approach rather than the looming election.
Q & A
Who is Keith Davidson and what is his role in the court proceedings?
-Keith Davidson is a former attorney for adult film star and director Stormy Daniels, as well as 1998 Playboy Playmate of the Year Karen McDougal. He is a critical witness in the court proceedings, being questioned by Trump's attorney Emil Beauvais.
What significant confirmation did Keith Davidson provide to the jury?
-Keith Davidson confirmed to the jury that he has never had any direct interactions with Donald Trump, the former president of the United States.
Why is the call between Keith Davidson and Michael Cohen in December 2016 significant?
-The call is significant because it is a point of focus for Trump's attorney, Emil Beauvais, who is trying to establish a narrative around Michael Cohen's state of mind and his expectations of a job in the Trump administration.
What did Keith Davidson testify about Michael Cohen's state of mind after not receiving a job in the Trump administration?
-Davidson testified that he thought Michael Cohen was so distraught about not receiving a job in the Trump administration that he believed Cohen might harm himself.
How is the defense trying to portray Keith Davidson in the court proceedings?
-The defense is attempting to portray Keith Davidson as an opportunist who profits off of tabloid culture and targets people for money, thereby casting doubt on his credibility and the legitimacy of his actions.
What is the defense's strategy regarding the timing of the payments made to Stormy Daniels?
-The defense is suggesting that the payments were made to avoid the appearance of extortion, particularly as they were made prior to the election, and that Keith Davidson was careful not to threaten that the payments be made before the election.
Why does the defense bring up other celebrities such as Lindsay Lohan and Hulk Hogan?
-The defense is using these examples to establish a pattern of Keith Davidson's behavior, painting him as someone who extorts people on behalf of his clients, and thus questioning his credibility and the tactics he used in the case at hand.
null
-null
What is the significance of the Access Hollywood tape in relation to Stormy Daniels' story?
-The Access Hollywood tape's release led to a surge of interest in Stormy Daniels' story, which Keith Davidson admitted was an opportunity for his client to potentially make money, highlighting the increased value of the story at that time.
What is the defense's argument regarding the timing of the payments to Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels?
-The defense argues that the reason for the payments in September and October 2016 was because Keith Davidson, as an opportunist, pounced on the situation when Trump was in a vulnerable position due to the upcoming election.
What is the defense's approach to undermining Keith Davidson's credibility?
-The defense is using a combination of questioning Davidson's memory on key issues, suggesting he has a history of targeting people for money, and implying that he is not being completely upfront about his dealings with other celebrities.
Why is the defense questioning Keith Davidson's memory regarding a supposed 90-day bar suspension?
-Questioning Davidson's memory about the suspension aims to undermine his credibility, suggesting that he is not being truthful or forthcoming, which could affect how the jury perceives his testimony.
What is the judge's role in the line of questioning regarding Keith Davidson's past with other clients?
-The judge may intervene to instruct Davidson to answer certain questions or to sustain objections if they believe the questioning is not relevant or is meant to harass the witness, as seen when Judge Mershon sustained an objection to a remark made by Trump's attorney.
Outlines
π€ Keith Davidson's Cross-Examination
The cross-examination of Keith Davidson, former attorney for Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, is underway. Davidson confirms he never interacted directly with Donald Trump. The questioning by Trump's attorney, Emil Beauvais, focuses on a call between Davidson and Michael Cohen in December 2016, where Cohen's disappointment at not securing a job in the Trump administration is discussed. Davidson's testimony suggests Cohen was so distraught it could have led to self-harm. The defense attempts to paint Davidson as an opportunist, highlighting his tactics in negotiating payments and insinuating potential extortion, especially regarding the timing of payments made to Daniels before the election. The strategy seems aimed at undermining Davidson's credibility and casting doubt on Michael Cohen's testimony.
π Davidson's Reputation and Client History
The defense continues to question Keith Davidson's credibility by bringing up his past work with other celebrities, including Hulk Hogan and Lindsay Lohan. They suggest a pattern of Davidson profiting off tabloid culture and exploiting vulnerable individuals. Davidson's representation of various celebrities is used to portray him as an opportunist who may have targeted people for money. The defense also questions Davidson's memory regarding a supposed bar suspension, aiming to cast doubt on his reliability. The judge is asked to instruct Davidson to answer questions about his past work, and the defense uses the opportunity to argue that Davidson's actions were part of a pattern, not specific to the case at hand.
π°οΈ Timing and Opportunism in the Legal Strategy
Trump's lawyers aim to convince the jury that Keith Davidson is an opportunist who capitalized on the timing of the alleged affairs involving Donald Trump, which occurred a decade before the payments were made. The defense argues that the reason for the payments in September and October 2016 was due to Davidson's threatening approach rather than the looming election. They suggest that Davidson's tactics are a common practice among those in the public eye, citing other celebrities like Charlie Sheen, Mark Wahlberg, and Arnold Schwarzenegger. The goal is to create doubt in the jury's mind about the motives behind the payments and to challenge the prosecution's narrative that the payments were made to influence the election.
Mindmap
Keywords
π‘Cross-examination
π‘Keith Davidson
π‘Donald Trump
π‘Stormy Daniels
π‘Extortion
π‘Michael Cohen
π‘Lindsay Lohan
π‘Hulk Hogan
π‘Charlie Sheen
π‘Bar Suspension
π‘Jury
Highlights
Keith Davidson, former attorney for Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, confirmed he never had direct interactions with Donald Trump.
Davidson testified that Michael Cohen was distraught at not receiving a job in the Trump administration, suggesting Cohen's instability.
Trump's attorney, Emil Beauvais, questioned Davidson's negotiation tactics to avoid the appearance of extortion.
Davidson admitted that the interest in Stormy Daniels' story surged after the Access Hollywood tape, indicating a strategic timing for monetary gain.
Defense attorneys for Trump suggested that Davidson targeted celebrities for monetary settlements, painting him as an opportunist.
Davidson's credibility was questioned as he repeatedly stated he could not recall certain events, raising doubts about his testimony.
Trump's attorneys attempted to establish a pattern of Davidson profiting off tabloid culture and vulnerable individuals.
The defense highlighted Davidson's alleged tactics, including a possible 90-day bar suspension, to undermine his integrity.
Davidson pushed back on allegations, stating he was providing truthful answers without breaching client confidentiality.
Trump's legal team aimed to convince the jury that Davidson's actions were part of a pattern of extortion, not unique to Trump's case.
The defense argued that the timing of the payments was influenced by Davidson's opportunistic approach rather than the election.
Davidson's representation of other celebrities like Lindsay Lohan and Hulk Hogan was brought up to portray him as someone who extorts people.
Trump's attorneys used the example of other wealthy individuals, such as Charlie Sheen, to argue that paying off allegations is commonplace.
The defense suggested that Davidson's actions were part of a broader scheme to target wealthy and vulnerable individuals for financial gain.
The judge sustained an objection to a remark by Trump's attorney, indicating rising tension in the courtroom.
Davidson's website, which features pictures of celebrities he has represented, was mentioned to emphasize his connections in the industry.
The defense's strategy is to cast doubt on Davidson's testimony to potentially discredit the prosecution's case against Trump.
Transcripts
Cross-examination is just
getting underway for a critical witness.
This is Keith Davidson,
the former attorney
for adult film star and director
Stormy Daniels
as well as 1998 Playboy
Playmate of the Year Karen McDougal.
Mr.
Davidson
being questioned by Trump
attorney Emil Beauvais.
Davidson just confirmed
for the jury that he has never had
any interactions
directly with Donald Trump,
the former
president of the United States.
CNN reporters inside the courtroom
telling us
that Trump is staring at the witness
passing answer questions,
answers questions
from Donald Trump's attorney.
What's going on in
court is significant right now.
Emil Beauvais,
who is Donald Trump's
attorney, is talking to Keith Davidson,
the attorney
for Stormy Daniels,
and very little about Michael Cohen.
And Beauvais is zeroing in on a call
the Davidson had with Michael Cohen
in December. 2016.
Davidson testifies of Cohen quote,
I thought he was going to kill himself.
This is because Cohen had thought
he was going to get a job
in the Trump
White House, the Trump administration.
And he did not get that.
We know that Michael Cohen
was frustrated by that from Davidson's
previous testimony.
But this is the first time
we've ever heard Keith Davidson express
that he was convinced of Michael Cohen's
being so distraught
as to actually be in the realm of self
harm.
And Lanny Davis,
this is obviously being cited
as an example,
being brought forward
as an example of Cohen's instability,
his rashness.
Davidson says that Cohen's had times
at times
talked with him
about being Trump's chief of staff
or attorney
general.
I don't know if you
have any thoughts on this,
but that you know Michael Cohen
better than the rest of us.
First of all, that's
an opinion testimony by a lawyer, right?
It's not necessarily a fact.
And secondly,
no, I'm not going to comment on that.
I know Michael
is going to tell the truth,
and it'll be up to the jury
given those kinds of assertions,
whether he's believable.
And I think the key question
for everybody
watching
is whatever
Michael Cohen
did in the past,
when he testifies,
will the jury use common sense
and reach a conclusion
that what he's testifying to
and this moment is backed up and is true.
And it will be up to them to decide
We are getting updates
from inside the courtroom
as of this moment.
And Trump's attorney is suggesting
that Keith Davidson was careful
not to threaten that the payments
those to eventually went to Stormy
Daniels be made prior to the election.
Keith Davidson says he doesn't
remember this.
And Karen,
as we're looking
at this line of questioning,
essentially what a mill
Beauvais is asking, Keith
Davidson is
if he was trying to make sure
to avoid the appearance of extortion
as he was negotiating this payment,
getting this money
from Michael Cohen to his client,
Stormy Daniels.
What do you make of this
line of questioning that
that they've started with?
Well, there's always the concern
if you're negotiating one of these deals
on behalf of a client,
that you could be
or there could be an insinuation
of extortion, because, in essence,
they want to get that
issue out
in front of the jury
because it is kind of
a form of extortion. Right.
Pay me or I'm going to go forward.
It's legal.
It's lawful
because you're using an attorney
and you're not actually saying
those words that it's this or that.
But and so all lawyers are really careful
to do that when you're negotiating this.
So I'm not really sure why Davidson isn't
admitting that,
because you have to be careful of that
when you are negotiating
these types of deals.
But that's what they're trying to show
is just to plant
that seed in front of the jury,
because that's
what they're going to argue
that, look,
Donald Trump is being extorted
right before the election.
They paid Michael Cohen paid it off.
And they're really
drilling down on this
because Trump's attorney just asked
Keith Davidson again.
Keith Davidson
is the man who was acting as Stormy
Daniels as attorney at this time.
To say that in 2016
he was going, quote, right up to the line
without committing extortion.
Davidson responded and said,
I don't understand the question, Paula.
I mean,
we knew that
they were going to go on here
and try to
essentially make Keith Davidson
look bad as he was negotiating
these deals
and had been commenting
on how little money they believe
Trump had, how stingy he was, what it
and that line of questioning.
And he also set this up
because he talked about how interest
in his client,
Stormy Daniels
story had kind of waned
until the Access
Hollywood tape is released.
And then suddenly there's
this surge of interest.
So he admitted on the stand
during direct the right,
she knew this was her opportunity
to potentially make money.
And of course, he's
applying a lot of pressure
on Michael Cohen to get this money.
He also knows there's an incentive
to pay him before the election.
So it is a fine line.
And like I said earlier,
we knew that the defense attorneys
were going to seize on that.
And we are now learning
that Trump's attorney is pressing
Keith Davidson on
whether he helped someone
get paid in connection with that story.
They're talking about a Lindsay
Lohan story and a TMZ story about her.
Paul read,
I wasn't quite expecting Lindsay
Lohan to give up at the
first criminal trial
of a former president.
But here we are.
Yeah, well, not on my bingo card either.
But clearly
they're trying to establish Davidson
as being a bit of an opportunist. Right?
This is the game he plays.
This is how he makes money
profiting off of this tabloid culture
and people where in a situation
like Lindsay Lohan,
not in a very vulnerable position.
And it appears that they're now
going through other instances as well.
I think we're going to
hear a lot of other
really surprising names about to come up.
What's the point of bringing up
Hulk Hogan and Lindsay Lohan?
I mean, what is the pattern
that Trump's attorneys care?
I do believe
we're trying to establish here
with this line of questioning.
I think
they're trying to dirty up Keith Davidson
and make him look like he's
somebody who goes out and extorts people
on behalf of his clients. Right.
And I think what he's
and he keeps answering,
I don't recall to to six questions
so far from Amil Beauvais.
I mean, of course, you're
going to remember
whether or not
you represented a celebrity
like Lindsay Lohan or Hulk Hogan.
Or whoever they're talking about
that doesn't that
that's the kind of thing
that they're going to be able to say,
oh, come on, this guy's a liar.
It's not like they're talking
about someone you don't know.
You're going to remember
if this person you represented
or that you were involved
in was a particular celebrity.
And once again,
they're going to
try to paint Donald Trump as the victim.
Of extortion
and a victim of political persecution.
But isn't that
is it this Keith Davidson thing?
I mean, you can go
look at Keith Davidson's website
right now.
I just looked at it the other day
and he has pictures
of a lot of the celebrities
that he has represented.
And Karen McDougal's picture
was on there for a time.
I don't know if it still is.
She was unhappy
with the fact that it was on there.
I mean, this is kind of cute,
Davidson's Lane.
That's why people went to him
and he was connected
with people like Stormy Daniels.
Yeah. And Trump's
lawyers here are arguing
that you weren't trying
to secure
a great deal necessarily for your client
to do the best thing by her.
You were trying to get as much money,
not for yourself,
in addition to your client
when you knew someone in this case.
And then candidate
Trump was
in an especially vulnerable position.
I mean, go back to his direct
where he talked about
how he knew
Stormy Daniels
story was suddenly more valuable
after Access Hollywood tape.
And while he says that he testified here
on Cross
that no one talked directly about it
as impacting the election,
they do later on in the transaction.
There are those text messages.
Now, the defense has moved on to here
we go.
Davidson's work with clients were paid
by Charlie Sheen
asking whether he took steps
that caused Sheen to pay his client.
Again, bringing up more examples
of how Davidson
may have targeted people for money.
We asserted
there was some tortious activity
committed and valid settlements
that were expected.
Now, the defense attorney doubts
that Davidson,
your memory seems a little fuzzy
or on some of these issues
you and Karen
were just talking about that,
how he keeps saying, I cannot recall.
So now
I'm only the undermining his credibility
in terms of the type of work he did
and whether it was extortion,
but also the fact that he's
not being completely upfront
about exactly how some of these deals
with other celebrities came to fruition.
Trump's attorney was asking him
about our supposed 90 day bar suspension
that Keith Davidson was under a
Davidson said he did not recall that.
And Trump's attorneys
seem to be skeptical of that.
Trump's attorney says, quote,
We're both lawyers.
I'm not here to play lawyer
games with you.
The judge, Judge
Mershon, sustains
an objection to that remark.
I mean, this is getting contentious.
I mean, all they're trying to do here,
and it's quite
effective is
if they can make him
out to be shady
and someone not to believe, then
any points that the prosecution
scored with this witness,
they're going to say,
you can't believe him either.
He's another liar.
He's shady
He says he doesn't remember these things.
Of course, you're going to remember
if you negotiated something
on behalf of a
of a celebrity
or that you were held that you
you were suspended,
your bar license was suspended.
Any lawyer would remember that.
So he's not like he's saying,
no, it didn't happen.
Right. He's saying, I don't recall.
And that is
that's going to be
something that the jury is going
to shake their head and say,
I'm not sure we can believe it.
And Davidson is pushing back
saying, I'm
giving you
truthful answers
that I'm not going to discuss
confidential answers.
Talk about the Trump
or the client attorney privilege.
I mean,
I think it's important
to keep in mind here
that what Trump's team
knows, their only goal, their mind,
they just need one juror
to to to essentially side with them here.
That's exactly right.
And I think you're going to see them
do this with many of the witnesses.
I mean, the idea that you can't talk
about certain aspects of agreements
because of your duty, your former client.
Okay.
But not remembering a bar suspension.
Now, attorneys
are approaching
the bench, talking to the judge
for a sidebar up.
The defense attorney asked the judge
to instruct Davidson
to answer a question
about whether he remembers Charlie Sheen
paying his clients.
We'll see what the judge does here.
It also
seems to be going back
to the David Pecker tactic, the technique
that Trump's attorneys use.
They are where they brought up
Mark Wahlberg.
They brought up Arnold Schwarzenegger.