Trump’s lawyers accuse Stormy Daniels of lying and trying to get rich by selling ‘affair’ stories during brutal cross-examination… but she’s fighting back

Porn star Stormy Daniels pushed back during a brutal cross-examination by Donald Trump’s lawyer in criminal court after giving wild testimony from the stand about sex with Trump in the ex-president’s hush money case.

Daniels faced criticism from attorney Susan Necheles on Tuesday afternoon after prosecutors questioned her for hours about her alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 and the payment to keep quiet before he was elected president.

In one notable moment, Necheles asked Daniels during cross-examination if she hates Trump.

“Yes,” Daniels said passionately. Daniels said she wanted Trump “to be held accountable.”

Necheles tried to portray the adult film star as a liar who made up stories, but also as someone who wanted to get rich by telling the story of sex.

But Daniels didn’t pass up the heated cross-examination. She claimed her accusations against Trump were true.

Porn star Stormy Daniels at the launch of ‘Trump Vodka’ in Los Angeles in January 2007

At one point, their exchange turned testy when Necheles pressured Daniels for failing to pay Trump’s legal fees despite being ordered to do so by the court. The fees owed relate to Daniels’ failed defamation case against the former president, which was dismissed.

When Necheles questions whether Trump won the case, Daniels defiantly replies, “He had the upper hand, it turns out I didn’t lose.”

The tension continued to escalate as Necheles asked Danials a series of questions about making money off the claim that she had sex with Trump. Daniels responded “yes” when the lawyer mentioned her book.

Necheles asked if Daniels had been making money from the claim for more than a decade, to which Daniels shot back that she has not been paid for interviews in the United States.

When asked if she made money by claiming to have had sex with Trump, Daniels said she made money “by telling my story.”

Necheles told Daniels that story “made you a lot of money, right?”

“It also cost me a lot of money,” Daniels responded, visibly irritable.

A courtroom sketch of Stormy Daniels testifying in the hush money case on May 7

Former President Trump watched as prosecutor Susan Hoffinger questioned Stormy Daniels about her story about sex with Trump and the payment made while he was running for president to keep quiet

Former President Donald Trump speaks in Manhattan Criminal Court on May 7, 2024. His attorney Todd Blanche is by his side. After Stormy Daniels was questioned by the prosecutor, Blanched called for a mistrial, but the motion was denied by the judge.

At another point, Necheles focused on the 2011 incident in which Daniels claimed she was threatened by a man in a Las Vegas parking lot to stop talking about her meeting with Trump.

Necheles asked if the reason Daniels finally revealed the threat in 2018 was because she used it as an excuse for never making it public before. Daniels replied “no.”

“Are you using this supposed threat as an excuse to tell people that this is why I haven’t spoken publicly?” Necheles wondered.

Daniels countered that she did talk about it on a radio show in Tampa in 2007.

Necheles brought up Daniels’ former attorney, Michael Avenatti, who offered $100,000 to find the man, and “no one ever came forward” to identify him.

Daniels stated that many people had come forward, but she was unsure why there was no follow-up.

“This man never existed?” Necheles said.

“He absolutely existed,” Daniels shot back.

“Is the whole story made up?” Necheles said.

“None of it was made up,” Daniels stated.

The heated arguments were just some of many, with Necheles trying to poke holes in Daniels’ testimony throughout the afternoon.

Jurors taking notes as Stormy Daniels detailed her sexual encounter with Donald Trump at a hotel in 2006

The court is set for the day, with Daniels still having to undergo detailed cross-examination. Her testimony is expected to resume Thursday.

After Daniels testified that morning, Trump’s legal team called for the case to be dismissed. They rejected her salacious testimony and wondered how to bounce back from it in a way that is fair to Trump.

Judge Juan Merchan even said that there is ‘probably things that were better left unsaid” in her testimony, noting that the witness “a a bit difficult to control.’

But he also said he didn’t believe they had gotten to the point where a mistrial would be warranted. He even said he was “surprised” that there were not more objections from the defense, but that this could be resolved through cross-examination.