There were significant developments in two of former President Donald Trump's ongoing criminal cases on Tuesday that, while not outright wins, nonetheless will likely play to his benefit.

In Florida, the judge presiding over Trump's classified documents case indefinitely delayed an eventual trial -- likely until after November's election -- while in New York, porn actress Stormy Daniels testified about her alleged affair with Trump 18 years ago in a scene that exemplified what a farce that prosecution is.

Classified documents case indefinitely delayed

The Associated Press reported on Tuesday that federal Judge Aileen Cannon formally canceled the always tentative May 20 trial date she had initially set last year in Special Counsel Jack Smith's prosecution of former President Trump for his alleged unauthorized retention of classified documents after leaving the White House.

The judge further demurred on setting a new trial date at this point, given the multitude of pending motions and time-consuming hearings that must first be addressed.

In a five-page order, Cannon set dates between now and late July for more than a dozen hearings and conference calls to deal with dismissal motions, classified document procedures, and various status reports.

"The Court also determines that finalization of a trial date at this juncture -- before resolution of the myriad and interconnected pre-trial and CIPA issues remaining and forthcoming -- would be imprudent and inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider the various pending pre-trial motions before the Court, critical CIPA issues, and additional pretrial and trial preparations necessary to present this case to a jury," the judge wrote.

"The Court therefore vacates the current May 20, 2024, trial date (and associated calendar call), to be reset by separate order following resolution of the matters before the Court, consistent with Defendants’ right to due process and the public’s interest in the fair and efficient administration of justice," she added.

Stormy Daniels' "salacious" and "unnecessary" testimony about alleged affair

Meanwhile, in New York, where former President Trump is on trial for alleged falsification of business records, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's team of prosecutors called porn actress Stormy Daniels to the stand to testify about the alleged 2006 extramarital affair with Trump that tenuously underlies the criminal charges pressed against him, according to Fox News.

Bragg has asserted, albeit without much evidence, that Trump falsified business records to cover up his reimbursement in 2017 to then-personal attorney Michael Cohen of the $130,000 that Cohen paid to Daniels in 2016 to silence her accusations with a nondisclosure agreement.

Daniels' at-times graphic testimony about her supposed tryst with Trump 18 years ago, which Judge Juan Merchan reluctantly -- and later, perhaps regrettably -- allowed was both "salacious" and unnecessary, and prompted objections and calls for a mistrial from Trump's defense team.

Daniels' testimony only meant to "humiliate" Trump, served no other legal purpose

According to National Review's Andy McCarthy, the testimony from Daniels was meant solely to "humiliate" and politically damage former President Trump, as it otherwise had no bearing on the criminal charges he faces.

McCarthy summarized: "The point of this trial is to bruise Donald Trump politically -- to humiliate him with a tawdry sexual episode from nearly 20 years ago that is utterly unnecessary to prove the charges in the indictment (even as those charges have been distorted by Alvin Bragg, Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney); and to brand Trump a 'convicted felon' so that his Democratic opponent, President Biden, can refer to him that way in the run-up to the 2024 election, after which -- probably a year or more after which -- any convictions from this kangaroo court will be overturned on appeal."

"Just to remind you, the allegation in the indictment is that Trump fraudulently caused his business records to be falsified eleven years after this encounter. The encounter makes no difference to the proof of the charges," he continued. "The state’s theory is that Trump’s records are false because they described as ongoing 'legal services' what was actually the reimbursement of a debt to Trump’s lawyer (in connection with a legal transaction in which the lawyer did, in fact, represent Trump). Whether the debt arose out of paying Stormy for an NDA or some other obligation is of no moment to the question of whether the book entry 'legal services' accurately describes the payments to Cohen."

McCarthy acknowledged that Daniels' testimony marked "a bad day for Trump personally, and for his family," given the embarrassing subject matter, but concluded that -- likely to Trump's benefit -- "It’s a worse day for the legal system in New York. To see it used so unabashedly for partisan political purposes is stunning. It won’t recover so easily."