Yeah, I think I've read as much as I really want to. Mostly wanted to see if the Times' characterization of the day was accurate (big surprise -- not! -- it really wasn't) and to get some of the "salacious" details that they weren't reporting (another big non-surprise -- they did).
The Times already got out all the good details, and things don't read off the paper as being nearly as contentious as they made it sound; they made it sound like the judge was sustaining objection after objection, but it looked pretty even-handed to me.
The prosecution obviously wants Stormy's characterization of Trump to get into people's minds -- her fears, the power imbalance, and just how pathetic he is that he pretty much has to use his position of power to get laid, and even then sucks at it and can't get as much as he wants. And the Defense doesn't want that, because they're acting at his behest. (Also, tbf, it really does NOT have all that much to do with the case.)