Below is my column in the Hill on the sentencing this week of President-Elect Donald Trump in Manhattan. Judge Juan Merchan waited to schedule the hearing for just ten days before the inauguration, limiting the time available to appeal. His order suggests that, if there is any interruption or delay in his sentencing, he might follow the advice of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and suspend sentencing for four years, a terrible option that we previously discussed. One could call that passively aggressive, but it seems quite actively aggressive.
Here is the column:
At 9:30 a.m. on Jan. 10, 2025, the curtain will fall on the longest performance of “Hamlet” in history. Acting Justice Juan Merchan will finally decide whether “to be or not to be” the judge to sentence Trump to jail. (Spoiler alert: He appears set to avoid a jail sentence and likely reversal.)
Since Trump’s conviction in May 2024, Merchan has contemplated his sentencing options. This was to be the orange-jump-suit moment many longed for over years of unrequited lawfare. They will likely be disappointed. As some of us noted after the verdict, this type of case would often result in an unconditional discharge or a sentence without jail time. That prediction became more likely after Trump was reelected in November. Limits on Trump’s freedom or liberty would likely result in a fast reversal, and Merchan knew it.
While various pundits predicted that Trump “will go to jail” after the trial, more realistic lawfare warriors had other ideas. The next best thing was to suspend proceedings and leave Trump in a type of legal suspended animation. Merchan would hold a leash on the president as a criminal defendant awaiting punishment.
But the whole point of a trophy-kill case is the trophy itself. Merchan will not disappoint. While indicating that he is inclined to a sentence without jail or probation, he will finalize the conviction of Trump just 10 days before his inauguration. In so doing, he will formally label the president-elect a convicted felon.
It will be punishment by soundbite. Trump will become the first convicted felon to be sworn into office, a historical footnote that will be repeated mantra-like in the media.
Merchan seems at points to be writing the actual talking points for the talking heads. In his order, he states grandly that the jurors found that this “was the premediated and continuous deception by the leader of the free world.” He then adds that he could not vacate the conviction because it would … constitute a disproportionate result and cause immeasurable damage to the citizenry’s confidence in the Rule of Law.”
Of course, this did not work out as many hoped. That apparently includes President Biden. Last week, the Washington Post reported that Biden was irate over the Justice Department’s failure to prosecute Trump more quickly to secure a conviction before the election. He also reportedly regretted his appointment of Attorney General Merrick Garland as insufficiently aggressive in pursuing Trump. It appears Garland was not sufficiently Bragg-like for Biden’s lawfare tastes.
The sentencing, however, will have another impact. Trump will finally be able to appeal this horrendous case. It has always been a target-rich opportunity for appeal, but Trump could not launch a comprehensive appeal until after he was sentenced.
Those appellate issues include charges based on a novel criminal theory through which New York County District Attorney Alvin Bragg not only zapped a dead misdemeanor into life (after the expiration of the statute of limitation) but based a state charge on federal election law and federal taxation violations. So, after the Justice Department declined to prosecute federal violations, Bragg effectively did so in state court with Merchan’s blessing.
The issues also include Merchan’s absurd instructions to the jury. The novel theory demanded a secondary offense, the crime that Trump was seeking to conceal by listing payments as legal expenses. Merchan allowed the jury to find that the secondary offense was any of an array of vaguely defined options. Even on the jury form, they did not have to specify which crimes were found. Merchan did not require even a majority, let alone a unanimous jury, to agree on what actually occurred.
Under Merchan’s instruction, the jury could have split four-four-four on whether this was all done to conceal a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations. Neither Trump nor the public will ever know.
Even CNN’s senior legal analyst Elie Honig denounced the case as legally flawed and unprecedented. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) recently put it more simply and called the case total “b—s–t.”
While expectations are not great for the New York legal system itself, this case will eventually go to the United States Supreme Court.
Of course, like so much else in the vortex of Merchan’s courtroom, the final leave to appeal comes at a cost. While Merchan admits begrudgingly that incarceration is no longer “practical,” Trump will now have to appeal this case over the course of his presidency.
When the sentence is imposed on Jan. 10, it is likely to feel comically downsized given the effort. After years and millions spent in the various Trump cases, Trump will likely receive an unconditional discharge and sent along his way . . . to the White House.
As predicted, the two federal cases never saw a trial in Florida or Washington, D.C. In Georgia, Fani Willis was dropped from her racketeering case, which has gone nowhere due to her own misconduct. It is like the Allied forces launching the Normandy Invasion to capture Monaco.
In the meantime, the 2024 election proved to be the largest verdict in history after years of lawfare and biased media reporting came to nothing. Merchan showed little self-awareness in claiming that he was only trying to avoid “immeasurable damage to the citizenry’s confidence in the Rule of Law” in continuing the case. Polls show the public saw these cases as lawfare and Merchan is widely viewed as causing precisely that “immeasurable damage” with his handling of the case.
Given this record, it may be fitting that the trophy from the New York case is a media talking point, while it lasts.
So, Merchan’s performance of Hamlet on the Hudson will close off Broadway long after the audience has left. The reviews will be mixed since few minds will be changed. As the protagonist himself proclaimed, “I must be cruel only to be kind; thus bad begins, and worse remains behind.”
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
donald trump, regardless of his sychophant’s protestations to the contrary, has not been treated unfairly by the criminal justice system-he’s the living embodiment of the assertion that this country has a two tiered justice system-any other defendant would have been tried months, even years, ago-his constitutional inability to admit fault or wrong doing renders him renders him an unamerican seditious buffoon-thank goodness for bragg’s prosecution of trump, as well as e.jean carroll’s lawsuits-
Did you vote for Joe Biden?
Utter nonsense – it doesn’t take a law degree to see it either.
What is utter nonsense?
A cow with ten teats….
91 SHAM CHARGES BY DEMS ONLY
ATS aparently you are unfamiliar with the criminal justice system. First – the Bragg case against Trump would never have been brought against anyone else.
Off the top of my head Hillary Clinton in the same political campaigh reported payments to a law firm to concoct the Steele Dossier as legal expenses.
The FEC dlapped her wrists for that – BECAUSE she also listed it as a campaign expense. Hillary is NY resident and is therefore subject to EXACTLY the same law used to prosecute Trump here. I do not see a case brought against hillary ?
Nor should their be. Why ? Because contra left wing nuts like yourself – a Crime is NOT anything the legislature calls a crime or a a prosecutor with a willing judge pretzelized into a claim of a crime. The state does NOT have the power to make whatever it wants into a crime. A crime requires the use of FORCE or FRAUD to violate the rights of another.
There is no allegation of Force here. Therefore Trump is being prosecuted for Fraud. ALL Frauds REQURE Actual Tanglible harm to another – see Blacks law dictionary. OR as none other than RBG in US Supreme court decisions has asserted – Fraud is a PROPERTY CRIME – it requires the taking or attempted taking of PROPERTY that is not yours through deceipt.
While Clinton inarguably engaged in fraud in the popular sense – she perpitrated a hoax on the american people, She did NOT commit fraud in the legal sense – no one was deprived of property that was actually theirs.
Still Clinton’s conduct was WORSE than what is alleged regarding Trump (though still not a crime) because Clinton DID violate Federal Campaign finance laws, while Trump did not.
Clinton paid for her fraud from campaign contributions. Trump paid for these NDA’s with his own money. The FEC long ago decided that securing NDA’s is NOT within the scope of election law, but EVEN if you argue that it was – trying to claim Trump made an illegal campaign contriibution fails, because candidates are free to donate as much as they want on their own campaigns – again see numerous supreme court decisions – regardless, do I actually have to explain to you why it would be unconstitutional to limit what a candidate can spend of their own funds on their own election ?
Regardless find me a single case anywhere in NYS (or anywhere at all) where there was a criminal prosecution of someone for listing on their own PRIVATE records that payments to a lawyer were “legal expenses”. In fact find me a single instance ever where ANY classification of an otherwise legitimate expense – and payment for NDAs is a legitimate business expense, has ever been prosecuted based on a claim that the expense was mischaracterized absent those records actually being used to commit some ADDITIONAL fraud – such as tax evasion. There is no claim of Tax evasion. In fact there is no claim that these private business records were ever used in any way to decieve an outside party – and deception is only a tiny part of proving fraud.
There are only two choices here – the NYS statute in question is unconstitutiuonally overbroad, of the correct choice – Bragg/merchan have applied the statute in a way that is unconstitutionally overbroad and far beyond how it was intended.
If you wish to claim that Trump has some additional priviledges as a result of great wealth – absolutely – he can afford the best of the best lawyers. The US constitution does not guarantee each of us the best of the best lawyers. It does not even guarantee us a good lawyer. But it DOES guarantee us all a lawyer. It is certainly a privildge of the wealthy to get price is no object legal representation.
At the same time – without any doubt no one except Trump would be prosecuted for this – because it is not a crime.
While many prosecution witnesses lacked credibility. The FACT is that if you assume that every single factual claim made by prosecution witnesses is true.
There is still no crime.
With respect to the Steele Dossier and Alpha Bank Hoaxes – Durham prosecuted danchenko and Sussman for lying to the FBI – which they admitted, but used the defense that the FBI knew they were lying. Regardless, lying to the FBI about something substanative that misleads investigators is a crime – merely lying to the FBI or anyone else is NOT a crime.
The crime of lying to the FBI (or lying to a federal agent) is roughly the equivalent of the British crime of wasting police resources.
Regardless, Durham did NOT charge Clinton or her aparatich’s with anything election related – because lying to win an election is not a crime. Hiding things to win an election is not a crime.
Tax evasion is a crime – there was no tax evasion here.
No one else aside from Trump gets prosecuted for this nonsense – because the allegations against Trump are not even using the facts alleged actual crimes.
John Say,
Thank you for taking the time to dismantle the anonymoron comment with real legal analysis and facts. I am grateful for not only the good professor, but other real, actual legal minds such as yourself, Daniel, JJC, Lin and all the other lawyers who comment.
“No one else aside from Trump gets prosecuted for this nonsense – because the allegations against Trump are not even using the facts alleged actual crimes.”
Others have been prosecuted using that statute in NY. That there is already precedent for using that was the reason why Merchan did not dismiss the case. The allegations against Trump were indeed backed by actual facts, witnesses, and evidence. That’s what was presented to the jury.
Using Clinton as an example ignores the difference between federal charges and state charges. Clinton was accused of violating federal statutes, not state. You keep mixing the two as if they were interchangeable. That’s not how you make a comparison. Durham could not prove Sussman lied. Allegations are not evidence and claims that the FBI knew would still require that they actually knew, not mere allegations that they did. Durham could not prove the allegations; that’s why Sussman was acquitted. Durham failed to prove his case. Just as you say you “know” he lied without proving it with evidence. Just saying you “know” is not enough in a court of law.
e jean carrol is a nut job who should have been laughed out of court.
She will ultimately lose on appeal. But that may take years depending on how recalicitrant the NYS courts are.
No this would not have been prosecuted in months. Criminal cases are never prosecuted this quickly except very rare occasions in which the defendant WANTS them prosecuted quickly. This is just an idiotic claim of left wing nuts. The right to a speedy trial belongs to the DEFENDANT. The right to the most thorough possible due process belongs to a criminal defendant – ALWAYS. Criminal cases are rarely prosecuted this quickly. And pretty much never when the defendant is not in jail awaiting trial, and there was ZERO possibility that MErchan could jail trump while awaiting trial for a non-violent crime that if absolutely everythng were proven would not result in a custodial sentence – except in the wet dreams of left wing nuts.
…can’t even spell sycophant.
Four years of “legal suspended animation” constitute unconstitutional, not double but infinite jeopardy.
The Nazi Party in Germany had its judges, but none more unreasonable and appalling than Roland Freisler. https://youtu.be/SKOCmBXrVY8
The New York Democratic Party also has its judges, but none more driven by ideology than Juan Merchan.
And every time the media repeats that mantra they’ll lose more readers because most of the country knows that a lawfare trial, like a kangaroo court and a witch trial, holds no credibility with the majority of the sane-thinking public. The Democrats will scratch their heads and continue wondering why they can’t get elected, and the MSM will naively ask, “How can we regain the trust of the public?” Advice to both: try telling the truth.
GioCon,
In order to tell the truth they have to first admit to themselves they have been lying and gaslighting American’s for eight years. The WaPo has lost a number of reporters and now reportedly there are going to be layoffs. Maybe this is the wake up call for not only Bezo’s losing money but for journalist if they want to keep their jobs, start by being real, objective journalist. Otherwise, they have a bright career as baristas. Oh, wait, I read Starbucks is closing a number of low performing stores as people do not want to pay $7 for a cup of their crappy coffee.
“Excitabat enim fluctus in simpulo ut dicitur Gratidius”
– Cicero
Thanks for the details of how Judge Merchan took away power from the jury to act in unanimity as finders-of-fact.
This pattern of elites disempowering juries is happening broadly across the entire judicial system, starting with Grand Juries empaneled to rubber stamp the D.A. or U.S. Atty.’ assertions, without any ability to demand to hear countervaling facts from another less-interested party.
It continues at trial with the lawyers and judge crafting dozens of pages of Jury Instructions that rob the jurors of ability to apply common sense and moral clarity. It’s time to fight back against this gradual commandeering of the system our Founders gave us. This won’t work by taking up positions on specific cases (attempting to try the case in the court of public opinion). It will work by challenging process tweaks that work against the independence and authority of the jury.
Deportation Nation
Juan Manuel Merchan must have his fake citizenship revoked and be deported back to his home and country of origin, Bogotá, Colombia, for criminal fraud, egregious abuse of power, usurpation of power, obstruction of justice, conspiracy to incriminate an innocent person and treason.
Columbian Justice
If he’s going to Columbia is a necktie due?
“If he’s going to Columbia is a necktie due?”
One may only hope so.
Do you think I judged him too harshly? You seem like a piece of kindling for my fire of justice.
Turley and others believe that the Supreme Court will overturn the jury’s verdict due to a vague claim of errors made by Judge Merchan. This is surprising because Merchan noted in a footnote that Chief Justice Roberts would not tolerate judges being threatened or pressured by politicians and the accused. Trump has a long and well-documented history of doing just that. If the Court were to take up Trump’s appeal, it would make Roberts look foolish.
What if a corrupt left-wing New York judge acts politically and partially and “threatens and pressures” the People of the United States of America with corrupt and illicit “lawfare?”
What has amazed me in all of this over the last night plus years is how often Democrats employ blacks to do their dirty work – the Black Caucus at the congressional level, black attorney generals and prosecutors at the state level, even what appears to have been, via internet video examples, the almost universal use of blacks in ballot harvesting efforts, etc. One assumes then two points: One, subservience – it’s like “give it to Mikey, he’ll eat anything” – who then is truly the white supremacist here? Secondly, that all of these individuals were both without scruples and corrupt from the very start. But, what I see, is an almost ubiquitous obsequiousness, and quite honestly, it’s not at all flattering.
Headquarters for Democrat election fraud are always in black precincts, because GOPs are afraid of false allegations of racism.
And yet the GOP makes no effort to get the black vote since it knows that whoever does it will be targeted by Democrat media. No better illustration of GOP spinelessness can found. What the Democrats have done to African Americans is awful. The GOP silence about it is almost unforgivable.
This is true but what has the GOP done to encourage blacks to vote for Republicans or addressed Blacks at all? Answer: nothing. So the GOP has remained silent even as the Democrats have ruthlessly and systematically – for over half a century – destroyed the black family, used immigration to destroy black employment, pumped billions of dollars to favored phony anti-poverty charities that have done nothing but enrich owners of those charities, criminalized an entire class of Americans so that 35% of black men are or have been in the criminal Justice system – and far more for which there isn’t time enough to set forth. As the Democrats systematically destroyed the black community the GOP remained and remains silent, cowed by Democrat media. Democrats can be expected to act like the immoral detestable %%#%^ they are. But the GOP silence is worse – it is unforgivable. And it has to speak out -!it isn’t as if this something hidden – the whole country knows what’s going on – except African Americans who are victims of decades of Democrat propaganda and conditioning.
Just wondering if anybody think Kamala Harris should not certify the 2024 election results?
Just wondering if you’re asking that question because you hope she won’t and are looking for support from others?
You took a wrong turn, this isn’t the Rachael Maddow blog.
Honestlyt, why would you think the f00ls here have any insight or sense in that matter?
She could show up too drunk and stoned to do it. It will be one more validation of the threat modern democrats are to the will of the voters. BUT… it will probably go off without a hitch and she will soldier on into to obscurity.
She knows the fastest way to raise money is to run for office and she has her eye on a presidential run.
Watch what happens, and what doesn’t.
Harris does not have the power to thwart certification.
What she can do is report the ec votes of different states – in whatever order she chooses, including the votes of alternate electors – if there are any and then ask the congress to accept or reject those EC votes. Individual congressmen ALSO have the right to object, though typically both a senator and a representative from the same state must object.
But finally though the process for counting the EC vote and certifying the election is specified by law, the FACT is that as the constitution notes – it is up to each congress to determine its own rules. A prior congress can not bind a subsequent congress with respect to the rules by which congress does its business. Put diffrently the Electoral Count act – whether the one of 1876 of the one pelosi past recently are just guides for congress. The only requirements regarding the rules of congress are those in the constitution.
“ Harris does not have the power to thwart certification.”
Trump and Eastman thought otherwise. If Pence was thought to have that power by Trump Harris theoretically could do the same thing. It’s what Trump wanted Pence to do.
BRANDON’S WOKE ERA may just be the appropriate term for the past dark chapter of American history; a term for America’s participation in the western woke world’s upside down, inside out era.
Anonymous. Do you have video of the attack and how do you know they were Trump supporters and not paid assets of the FBI.
Not same anonymous but… conspiracy theory much?
This is like framing the moon landing as: “How do you know that it wasn’t faked by NASA/Nixon?”
That is so backwards. If you have evidence that they WERE paid assets of the FBI, then present them. Do not ask someone disprove a ridiculous conspiracy with no basis in fact.
FBI lost count of how many paid informants were at Capitol on Jan. 6, and later performed audit to figure out exact number: ex-official
https://nypost.com/2023/09/19/fbi-lost-count-of-number-of-informants-at-capitol-on-jan-6-ex-official/
Watchdog reveals FBI had 26 confidential sources in DC during Jan. 6 riot
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/3258901/watchdog-reveals-fbi-had-26-undercover-sources-in-dc-during-jan-6-riot/
This is what I suspected. You shouldn’t be getting your “news” from those sites.
For example, here is a direct quote from D’Antuono, the source of that NYP article:
Question: You understand that the suggestion that the confidential human sources who were associated with the FBI and in the crowd on January 6th — that the implication of that is this theory that somehow the FBI was directing those people and, again, orchestrating sort of a false flag. Do you understand that that’s the suggestion?
A Absolutely, I understand that, yes.
Q And what is your response to that?
A That that is furthest from the truth.
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2023-06-07-ti-of-steven-dantuono-redacted.pdf
So, tell me, how can sending an article where D’Antuono is the source can be used as evidence that FBI orchestrated the J6 attack?
I would LOVE to hear your response. Please get your news from more reputable corners of the internet and always verify the accuracy of any article you read.
Right – we should note Trust the media to report what the J6 IG Found ?
Just go read the J6 IG report or listen to the subsequent congressional testimoney.
I know this is hard for you left wing nuts, But the sun will still set tonight – even if Trump says it will.
Something is not false because you do not like the source.
It is false because it is an inaccurate representation of reality.
The reality of J6 is that there were ATLEAST 26 FBI “agents” involved in the crowd.
To be clear an “agent” in this case does not mean a Badge carrying graduate of Quantico.
It means a person whose actions are sufficiently tied to government that government owns what they do.
The Actions of CHS’s – especially those the FBI is using to target specific groups, are by law the actions of that person as an agent of government.
I posted the actual primary source. The transcript of the testimony. There is no need to “trust” media when you actually find primary sources…
That was the whole point
Now we know how many secret sources the FBI had on Jan. 6, but what did they do?
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/daily-memo/3260074/secret-sources-fbi-january-6-what-did-they-do/
FBI Had Multiple Informants at Capitol on Jan. 6: Inspector General Report
https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/fbi-had-29-informants-in-washington-on-jan-6-inspector-general-5775174
Either way Acting Justice Juan Merchan and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg have ‘a plan’ and will stick the mission of DNC’s Agenda.
The ‘Lawfair’ tactic was a Shotgun approach with 6+ Suits.
According to the left publication ‘The Atlantic’
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/11/donald-trump-legal-cases-charges/675531/
The Worst I see it is that He (Trump) will be confined to the White House premises with an ankle bracelet for a time.
He’ll then work the Networks like Martha Stewart and Snoop Dog – Ka-Khing!
While ‘confined’ he will have plenty of time to dish out revenge. They keep pushing him and it’s going to come back 10 fold.
Meantime the War Mongers will keep punching away at getting WW-III topside and hot.
Ultimately, not only did the lawfare fail to prevent Trump from running for president, it could easily be argued it was the primary reason Republicans will now control Congress and the White House. This sentencing will be the historical headline detailing the tyranny of government during the Obama & Biden regimes.
Merchan had many ways of dismissing this case but rejected them all.
I think Trump has the right to appeal both of Merchan’s immunity decisions before any sentencing occurs. If he does appeal them, and the sentencing is stayed, that will take the matter past Jan 20, and Trump can then also argue that as a sitting President the arguments cannot be heard, and in any event sentencing must be delayed. The matter would then be on hold until he leaves office. At which point, if he loses and gets to sentencing, the argument against jail or other penalties based on his status as President will no longer apply.
So Trump may be better off being sentenced to an unconditional discharge now and then appealing on all the abuses that occurred during the trial. No one will view negatively the label “convicted felon” and many will view it in this case as a badge of honour.
Trump has now said he is appealing both immunity decisions and has applied to Merchan for an automatic or discretionary stay of sentencing.
classic lawfare?
No one will view negatively the label “convicted felon” and many will view it in this case as a badge of honour.
Deranged people will. Ironically, it will be a title he’ll proudly wear as a survivor of the very regime his administration will seek to dismantle.
Trump mug shot merchandise is already popular, as are I am voting for the felon T-Shirts.
Democrats continuing this is stupid.
Judge Merchan’s best out would be to kill this case himself.
That avoids a scathing oppinion from an appelate court that is inevitable.
Trump can try to appeal this now – but that is highly unusal, and requires the apelate courts permission.
If Merchan delayed sentencing indefnitely or significantly – Trump would almost certainly be allowed to appeal before sentencing.
But so long as there is a current and fixed date for sentencing, I doubt the apeals courts will hear any Trump appeal until AFTER sentencing.
Be interesting to see if this does make it to the SC, gets overturned and what the justices write and the dissenting view. If it does get overturned it could be a nail in lawfare coffin.
This will get overturned. The only question is which appelate court will overturn it and why.
The immunity error is the most likely to result in a quick reversal – but it is one of a long list of serious reversable errors on Merchan’s part.
The Left has it’s “Convicted Felon” language they wanted so badly. Now we will have “Pardoned Criminal” language that idiot Biden is gifting us. Looks like we will have a lot of them. You don’t pardon innocent people. Cheney, Clinton, Garland, perhaps even Merchan himself. Hope the Pardoned Criminals wear the name well.
What continues to amaze me is that the prog/left ALWAYS fails to see the glaring hypocrisy of their actions; nor do they allow themselves to realize that the rest of the world sees them for what they actually are, a criminal gang that owns the police and judges – sort of like the mafia.
Not for long , not anymore.
But these jihadi-type fanatics are deeply embedded within ALL levels of our various governments. Digging them out will be like ridding your home of cockroaches
@whimsicalmama
That is a signature of their sociopath: they don’t care. Really, they don’t care. They honestly don’t care, so long as, in their twisted minds, they somehow end up victorious. They will not stop, this will continue. Diogenes’ comparison to Caesar was not off the mark. They will not. Relent. So neither must we. We aren’t anything close to being through the woods yet; do not waver, not for a second. The real ugliness is yet to come from these patrons of ‘peace’, and it will be ugly, indeed.
It has been said, even by me,that we are fighting a cold civil war; no, this is globalist communism, straight up; we are fighting a cold world war. Heaven help Western Europe, it does not look good for them.
I agree, that is why I continually compare the prog/left brainwashed cultists to the mindset of the same jihadis flew planes into our towers, they are blindly addicted to their cult and there is only one method of stopping jihadis – and we all know what that is – logic is meaningless to a cult member
Actually you can pardon innocent people.
However you are correct that most people will perceive a pardon as an admission of guilt.
Except left wing nuts – who will ALWAYS find in their own favor regardles sof how absurd the issue or claim.
I am not sure what the left is hoping to gain with this move. Is this just one more slab of red meat for the base? The phrase Pyrrhic victory comes to mind. Do they really want a vindictive Trump entering office? Maybe they do. For Biden, Pelosi, Nadler, and Co. to publicly lament that their abuse of the legal system and rank lawfare wasn’t aggressive enough to jail Trump, and apparently keep him from winning the election, otherwise seems like an exercise in extreme stupidity. They aren’t even attempting to hide that this was entirely about jailing a political rival. Since this is now the precedent, I would imagine that Trump is just waiting for the first governor to defy one of his deportation orders and you will swiftly see a much different DOJ and FBI leading them off in handcuffs. Maybe the Left’s goal has gone beyond Reps and Dems to simply fomenting chaos. Maybe these leftists feel that their political future is safe and that they are simply untouchable.
Turley skips over the fact that Merchan couldn’t just throw the case out. After all, a jury found Trump guilty on 34 counts! Trump argued that he should be let off the hook because he claimed presidential immunity as president-elect, which is honestly a pretty weak and stupid argument. Trump hasn’t really made a solid case for dropping the charges. Sentencing him is just wrapping everything up and officially marking him as a felon. He probably won’t face jail time or even a fine, but he’ll lose some rights because of the conviction. When he’s out of office, he’s going to run into some issues. The evidence was strong enough that the jury found him guilty across the board.
George, saying a jury found him guilty is like the Soviets saying “hey, a jury found you guilty so it’s off to the gulag”.
Trump was railroaded and that is why the case will get tossed.
You really are dumb!
Hullbobby, you’ve got zero proof for why this case will get thrown out.
A jury found him guilty, and that’s just how this works. Turley can’t really point to any major mistakes that Merchan made, he just says “some errors happened” without actually clarifying or giving any solid legal reasons for it.
Trump brought this on himself. He delayed the case for as long as he could, and now he’s facing sentencing. That’s how the law functions. Trump thinks the law doesn’t apply to him because he’s president-elect, but there’s just one little issue—Trump isn’t president. Not until January 20, anyway.
“Turley can’t point to any major mistakes….” Odd thatthe guy that comments on here 100 times a day doesn’t recall the many times Turley AND OTHERS, including CNN’s Ellie Honig, have pointed out the many, many reversible errors committed by this rogue judge.
HullBobby,
Well said. It will be interesting to see if it gets overturned or makes it to the SC and is overturned there if they will point out all the mistakes made or how it was more about “getting Trump!” than law and order. If so, it could be a scathing rebuke of Bragg and Merchan. Sure, they can make the claim they “got Trump!” but then got smacked down in the appeals court or even worse, the SC. Just like Jack Smith. Merchan can probably just retire and claim he was doing it to “save democracy!” while being thoroughly embarrassed and a disgrace. Bragg, if he had any further political ambitions, those just might of gotten shot down.
They did not provide a legal explanation for the “many reversible errors” they mentioned; they merely claimed there were “errors” by referencing federal law, which does not apply since Trump’s charges are under state law. Turley seems to overlook that New York law allows for the kinds of charges he argues are erroneous. He relies on federal interpretations of federal statutes instead of state statutes. Additionally, he neglects to mention that there have been other convictions under the same state statutes, which is why the prosecution has been able to establish precedent for using them.
Do you even know where you are? Our gracious host has discussed a number of specific errors merchan has made in a number of his postings to his blog. Do you actually read his blog, or do you just sign on and start blathering about what’s going on in your tiny little mind?
Turley claims that a “novel criminal theory” was used, but he neglects to mention that this theory is not actually novel. It has been employed before without any issues in New York, which is why Judge Merchan allowed it. Trump challenged this theory previously and lost.
The instructions given to the jury were appropriate. Judge Merchan explained in detail what evidence they could use and what they could not. The issue for Turley is that he cannot clearly articulate why he believes the instructions were incorrect without conflating federal and state law. Trump was charged under state law, not federal law. Just because a federal statute exists does not mean it automatically supersedes state law.
Trump must be sentenced before he can appeal, which poses a problem for him. Once he is sentenced, he will officially be a felon. Trump will remain in this status for a considerable time before the Supreme Court decides to take up any appeal. They are unlikely to expedite a ruling on Trump’s behalf solely because he is president. Being a convicted felon won’t hinder his job as president. But it will leave him with the burden of being labeled a “convicted felon.”
Please cite a SINGLE case where falsifying business records was successfully prosecuted, without real tangible harm to a third party ?
I highly doubt you can find a single one.
Frankly I doubt you can find many cases of business records falsification.
One of the obvious problems with this case is that since Bragg’s “novel; theory” is that deception alone is enough for a crime,
that INHERENTLY means that Braggs application of the statute is unconstitutionally vague and unconstitutionally overbroad.
First because deception alone is NEVER a crime,
And second because because as is obvious from this case – what constitutes deception is HIGHLY subjective,
and we can not put before juries cases where the exact same FACTS are a crime to one jury and not to another based on a subjective determination.
Juries get to decide whether the evidence of an element of a crime is present. They DO NOT get to decide what constitutes by law that element of a crime.
This is AGAIN why there is no such thing anywhere as a crime whose ONLY element is a lie – because what constitutes a lie is hgihly subjective.
Idiots like you and this jury who have concluded that calling a payment to a lawyer a “legal expense” is a lie is precisely why this is not allowed.
We have many crimes of lying, but every single one has OTHER elements.
Perjury is NOT lying under oath – it is a lie about an issue of substance with regard to the tribunal. You can lie under oath about what you had for breakfast without committing a crime. You can lie to the police or to the FBI without committing a crime. But if you lie about something that is material to the investigation – you are committing a crime.
The point is you will not EVER get rational courts and certainly not the supreme court to find a law that makes lying alone a crime constitutional.
So NO you are not going to find other NYS cases where this law is applied in this way – and my understanding is despite Braggs claim – this law is rarely iff ever used, and if I were to bet it is only used as a supplement to tax evasion cases. Where they can get someone who cheated on their taxes to plead to something like this as a misdemeanor to avoid a felony tax evasion conviction.
Donald Trump had a better chance of being acquitted by the cast of The View than he did in that kangaroo court in New York City.
George competent legal scholars including some on the left have listed DOZENS of excellent reasons this case will get thrown out.
Turley has covered in detail numerous errors by merchan.
I have personally listed some of them in replies to your ignornant posts.
No Trump did not delay the case as long as he could. Had Mefchan not been trying to get a verdict come hell or high water before the election the case would have been delayed far longer.
The immunity error is the most likely to result in a rapid reversal and remand. Because it is clear – and right on point with what you have just said.
The question of presidential immunity was before the supreme court when Trump raised it with Merchan. The CORRECT desicion by Merchan was to defer deciding Trump’s motion to preclude various witnesses and evidence on presidential immunity grounds until AFTER SCOTUS ruled.
But Merchan RUSHED this case to trial, Got his conviction, and is now faced with a problem he can not repair – he allowed evidence and witnesses that SCOTUS later determine that he could not, and he also allowed evidence and witnesses that SCOTUS determined that he had to hold an immunity hearing to determine if they were adminissible – which he did not.
A reversal and remand on presidential immunity grounds is a slam dunk. The only question is what court will toss this first.
There are several other huge Slam Dunk judicial errors by Merchan. The Harvey Weinstein reversal came down early int he trial, yet Merchan went forward with witnesses that NYS’s highest court had decided in the Weinstein case were inadmissible. There are Trump witnesses that were excluded or testimony that was not allowed.
Testimony is ALWAYS admissible to impeach a witness. Yet Merchan limited the testimoney of Attorney Costello with respect to Cohen.
Merchan’s jury instructions were unconstitutional – that is HUGE. Errors in jury instructions are pretty much NEVER harmless.
There is the fact that the predicate felony that elevatges the misdemenaor to a felony was NOT CHARGED, and NOT REVEALED until the prosecutions closing arguments.
Again that is a fatal error. Worse Merchan instructed the jury that they could decide that the presidcate felony had occured – without finding the each element of that predicate felony was, or even unanimously agreeing on what the predicate felony was.
This is just a few of the many serious errors by Merchan.
I would further mention that Merchan presided over a case where a family member had a financial interest – that is not only barred by the judicial rules of ethics,
It is actually a CRIME. As Turley has noted REPEATEDLY with respect to corruption charges against Joe Biden. All that is necescary to prove Bribery is to prove that a close family member received payment and that the public official acted to meet the conditions of that payment.
Merchan’s daughter financially benefited from the Trump conviction – and Merchan repeatedly rule outside the law to assure than conviction.
That is bribery, that is public corruption, that is violation of a persons rights under color of law.
That is very nearly EXACTLY what the case for kids judges in Luzerne county that Biden just commuted did.
Merchan’s exposure here is more than judicial error – it is Criminal.
While I do not expect to see him prosecuted, there is a far stronger case against MErchan than ANY of the indictments against Trump.
We all know George is a programmed, indoctrinated tool for a gang of criminal thugs. He is either totally naive or too unwise to understand just how he is being used. Until he goes through a complete TDS detox he will never be right in the head again.
@George
Paid or not, you contrarian trolls are narcissists, and you are boring. 🥱🥱
James, yet here you are still reading “contrarian viewpoints” because that is what happens when free speech is exercised.
Your comments aren’t entirely useless. They’re usually good for a laugh.
@George
Nope. Just saw your name. Didn’t read your nonsense, and I never will; I responded to your illogical *presence* where 99% of the people here disagree with you and are educated and experienced (the experience part is important, you are not indoctrinating gen z on this site) enough to know what they are talking about, including me. You waste your time, and if you are paid, you waste your employer’s dollars. Nobody cares. Go blow, termite.
It will be overturned. But you did have your few days in son right George?
On what grounds?
91 SHAM charges by DEMS only. Political lawfare like dictators use!
Of course Merchan can throw the case out. He can throw the case out – because the jury got it wrong. He can throw the case out, because he erred in allowing testimony that was precluded by the Supreme court immunity decision or the NYS Courts Weinstien decision, he can throw the case out because he made numerous errors of law during the trial.
There are an infinite number of reasons he can throw the case out.
No the presidential immunity argument is not weak or stupid. Bragg offered And Merchan allowed evidence that Trump and his lawyers objected to on the grounds that its introduction was barred by presidential immunity. In a different case SCOTUS ruled in favor of Trump.
This is a significant and obvious legal error. It REQUIRES throwing the verdict out, Arguably it may prohibit retrying the case.
Regardless, when a judge makes significant legal errors – and Merchan has made dozens of very significant legal errors,
Even ONE of those errors is sufficient to require tossing the entire case and starting over.
The immunity issue though a legal technicality is sufficient a problem that it requires throwing out the indictment.
Had Trump lost the election – and Merchan been stupid enough to sentence Trump – which I doubt he would have – this was always about the election, as merchan, you, and myriads of democrats make clear constantly, this would have been appealed and it would be reversed quickly.
While a reversal on the grounds that Merchan allowed evidence to be admitted that was barred by presidential immunity would be the most obvious grounds to overturn this case, There are many many others.
While NY courts have fallen over themselves to protect this case, the FACT is Merchan is conflicted (multiple ways) and could not try this case.
Even ignoring the conflict because an immediate family member had an interest in the outcome of the case, Merchan has the separate problem that he participated in blackmailing Weinberg in the Enmoron Case. While his actions were “legal” unfortunately, they precluded him from presiding over any case in which Weinberg was a potential witness.
Then there is the fact that there was no basis for either of the women’s testimony.
There is no crime related to the allegations of Trump’s infidelity, there is no crime related to securing the NDA’s. It does not matter with respect to the law on this case whether Trump had sex with these women or not.
The foundational claim – without which everything else fails, is whether calling payments to a lawyer for securing an NDA a legal expense is Fraud.
There are several REQUIRED elements for a crime of Fraud, and absolutely no evidence was presented of most of them.
The first is that there must be a lie – calling payments to a lawyer for pretty much any purpose “legal expenses” is not a lie. There is no FASB or GASB catagory for NDA payments, and even if they were in private business records for a catagorization to be a lie would require that the expense can not under any circumstance be called as it was. NOT, the prosecutors prefered catrogory is X.
You can report purchases of gas for your car as fuel/gas, auto, travel, or any of myriads of other catagories legitimately.
You could falsely report gas expenses as office, or supplies, or trash, and though False it would not be a crime, unless the miscatagorization was both deliberate AND caused tangible harm. The most common form of tangible harm in reporting business expenses would be tax avoidance. Hunter Biden deducted expenses for drugs and prostitutes from his taxes – those are not deductable business expenses and that is an example of tax fraud. Conversely payments to a lawyer for an NDA are no matter what label is applied to them deductable business expenses. Therefore even if Trump had FALSELY reported the NDA costs, that would still NOT be legally fraud.
This is extremely important – all claims that something is a lie are not crimes – or the entire country would be in jail.
This case is the textbook for unconstitutionally broad and vague.
But in this case the problem is not that the law is unconstitutionally broad or vague – it is that the prosecutors and courts application of the law is unconstitutionally broad and vague. Regardless any law or application of the law that catches alleged lies that do not result in tangible harm and treats them as a crime is unconstitutional.
I know this is hard for left wing nuts – but you can not make anything you do not like into a crime.
I would note that Clinton reported her payments to Perkins Cole for the Steele Dossier as “legal expenses”. The FEC hit her with a diminimus fine, but neither he DOJ nor the State of NY prosecuted her for “falsifying business records” – because she did not. Just as Trump did not when he called payments to a lawyer for an NDA legal expenses.
The fundimental problem for Clinton is that she called the expense a campaign expense while collecting federal matching funds.
Trump did NOT make that mistake. He did NOT pay for the NDA with campaign funds. Though I would note that even if you try to claim they were a campaign contribution – the Supreme court long ago rules that election laws CAN NOT limit the amount that a candidate can spend of their own money on their own campaign. So long as Trump used his own money there was no way to violate election law.
Which BTW means that the claim that Trump violated NYS election law is error as a matter of law – and just another of the many reasons that the case must be thrown out.
There was also the judges idiocy of failing to allow the SEC chair from testifying on election law. Not only was merchan required to allow his testimony – but he was required to certify him as an expert on election law – it would be hard to find someone who was more expert.
So that is another major legal error by the judge – a reverseable error.
John Say,
Great comment and interesting legal analysis.
George, what are you holding on to here? “…….he’ll lose some rights because of his conviction. When he’s out of office, he’s going to run into some issues.” When he leaves office, Trump will be a very wealthy, 82 year-old former President. Do you think he’s concerned about some club in NYC won’t accept him?
“Turley skips over the fact that Merchan couldn’t just throw the case out.”
Of course he can.
You are incredibly ignorant of the law.
No the evidence was not strong – through to this day there is not even an actual crime alleged.
Soon after, as the mob descended on lawmakers certifying the results of the 2020 election, won by Joe Biden, Michael Fanone, then a District of Columbia Metropolitan Police officer, would be viciously assaulted as he defended the U.S. Capitol. He was electroshocked on his neck with a Taser; he was kicked and beaten. His radio was ripped off his body; his badge stripped away from him. The group of men who assaulted him came at him five at a time. Fanone had a heart attack and lost consciousness. At one point during the assault, he pleaded with the Trump supporters clawing at him to consider his children.
Do you have video of this ?
I ask because numerous Officers have testified to nonsense like this, and pretty universally the video has refuted their claims.
Many ofg the officers who have testified are clearly guilty of perjury.
I would also note – related to what you offered that police officers in situations like this DO NOT get themselves into situations where they are separated from other officers.
There is lots of video of J6 – and there are people doing things they should not have, But I have not seen a single instance where multiple protestors ganged up on one police officer.
You do not see that because the police are Trained not to allow that possibility.
Separately – I m not aware of a single instance in which as protester used a taser. Tasing a police officer anywhere in this country would result in ATLEAST an agrevated assault charge and possibly an attempted murder charge.
Provide the evidence to support your claims. There is over 50,000 hourse of video of the 3 hours of J6, There is nowhere and nothing that was not covered. There is few if any places that were not covered from multiple different angles.
We keep seeing the same J6 footage from the left and the MSM over and over.
For good reason – it is all they have.