NYU law professor Ryan Goodman explained that it “could actually have been worse” for the former President.
It” could really be worse” for the former president, explained NYU law professor Ryan Goodman. It” could really be worse” for the former president, explained NYU law professor Ryan Goodman.
NYU law professor Ryan Goodman explained that it “could actually have been worse” for the former President.
Die Kommission ist befugt, delegierte Rechtsakte gemäß Artikel 264 in folgenden Bereichen durchzuführen: Ryan Goodman, a law professor at New York University, highlighted how a potential shift in strategy from Donald Trump’s legal team during his hush money trial could have negative consequences for the ex-president. CNN’s Erin Burnett mentioned that Trump’s lawyers may opt to conduct a more vigorous cross-examination of Stormy Daniels when the trial resumes, which could ultimately be detrimental. The criminal case is centered around the claim that Daniels had a romantic relationship with Trump in 2006 and that he paid her to remain silent before the 2024 election. Trump is being accused of manipulating business records in order to conceal the payment. He refutes the accusations. During her testimony on Tuesday, Daniels provided personal information about her alleged sexual encounter with the reality TV star at the time. Goodman believes that Trump’s defense team attacking Daniels to protect his reputation could have negative consequences. Goodman also expressed that this approach could lead to Daniels revealing more details about why she felt uncomfortable during the encounter, possibly including testimony about it being nonconsensual. He mentioned that Trump’s lawyers extracting more information from Daniels could prove to be detrimental for him. Additionally, Goodman suggested that while Trump’s team might have grounds for appeal, they risk losing that opportunity if they handle Daniels too aggressively. A request for a mistrial due to the inclusion of sensational and biasing details from Daniels will not be valid because they could actually be introducing this information themselves, which could weaken their ability to appeal the final decision. We hebben uw hulp nodig voor onze dekking in 2024.
