This is John Bachelor, conversation with my colleagues that is McCotter, American Greatness and Andrew McCarthy National Review online. Observing that the testimony by Ms Daniels in the brag prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

The testimony, the remarks, the storytelling, all of that does not connect in a logical fashion to the allegations brought by the

prosecutor against Mr. Trump as Andy explains largely irrelevant is how Andy puts it and here he is to explicate

why it is that all of this Sturman drying is not useful for the decision the jury must make. More of this tonight.

Only in the most tangential fashion, John, and not in a way that's relevant to the trial and I you know look in a in a

cosmic sense obviously Stormy Daniels story that Trump denies that they had a sexual encounter in 2006.

You can't say it's completely unrelated to the case because the case involves a payment

that was made to Stormy in 2016 on the eve of the election for $130,000 by Michael Cullen on Trump's behalf and

then what the case is actually about as you referred to is how that was booked in the Trump business records in 2017.

So the case is actually about the business records.

The reason I say that her testimony is largely irrelevant is because for purposes of the case that has been charged, it doesn't make any difference whether the sexual encounter happened or did not happen.