Judge rules Trump does not have presidential immunity protections in hush money conviction

signalmankenneth

Verified User
Donald Trump’s felony conviction in the New York hush money case should not be tossed out because of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, Judge Juan Merchan ruled Monday.

Merchan’s decision rejected one of several avenues that Trump’s lawyers have taken to try to dismiss Trump’s May guilty verdict on 34 counts of falsifying business records. The judge did not, however, rule on a motion from Trump’s attorneys to dismiss the conviction because Trump has now been elected president.

Instead, his 41-page decision focused on the question of presidential immunity.

Merchan wrote the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump should receive broad immunity for official acts during his time in office did not mean the conviction should be dismissed, ruling that the evidence presented by the Manhattan district attorney’s office was not related to Trump’s official conduct as president.

The evidence contested by Trump’s lawyers, the judge wrote, related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and should receive no immunity protections.

“This Court concludes that if error occurred regarding the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan wrote. “Even if this Court did find that the disputed evidence constitutes official acts under the auspices of the Trump decision, which it does not, Defendant’s motion is still denied as introduction of the disputed evidence constitutes harmless error and no mode of proceedings error has taken place.”

Trump transition spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement that Merchan’s decision “is a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity, and other longstanding jurisprudence.”

Trump’s lawyers are likely to appeal Merchan’s decision, one of several potential motions for dismissal that could leave the case tied up for months or even years. Merchan still has to rule on Trump’s argument that his status as president was a “legal impediment” to further criminal proceedings and the case should be dismissed as a result.

Trump has yet to be sentenced following his May conviction. Prosecutors have already agreed the president-elect would not be sentenced while he is in office, but the district attorney’s office has argued in legal filings that the felony conviction should still stand. Prosecutors wrote that while the sentence could be delayed or modified, dismissing a jury’s conviction altogether would be an unwarranted “extreme remedy.”

Trump was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records over payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to reimburse a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels, in order to keep her from speaking out about an alleged affair before the 2016 election. Trump has denied the affair.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-rules-trump-does-not-000503038.html

1734401250171.png
 
"Trump has yet to be sentenced following his May conviction. Prosecutors have already agreed the president-elect would not be sentenced while he is in office,". From your own article. You fucking democrat retard.
 
Donald Trump’s felony conviction in the New York hush money case should not be tossed out because of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, Judge Juan Merchan ruled Monday.

Merchan’s decision rejected one of several avenues that Trump’s lawyers have taken to try to dismiss Trump’s May guilty verdict on 34 counts of falsifying business records. The judge did not, however, rule on a motion from Trump’s attorneys to dismiss the conviction because Trump has now been elected president.

Instead, his 41-page decision focused on the question of presidential immunity.

Merchan wrote the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump should receive broad immunity for official acts during his time in office did not mean the conviction should be dismissed, ruling that the evidence presented by the Manhattan district attorney’s office was not related to Trump’s official conduct as president.

The evidence contested by Trump’s lawyers, the judge wrote, related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and should receive no immunity protections.

“This Court concludes that if error occurred regarding the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan wrote. “Even if this Court did find that the disputed evidence constitutes official acts under the auspices of the Trump decision, which it does not, Defendant’s motion is still denied as introduction of the disputed evidence constitutes harmless error and no mode of proceedings error has taken place.”

Trump transition spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement that Merchan’s decision “is a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity, and other longstanding jurisprudence.”

Trump’s lawyers are likely to appeal Merchan’s decision, one of several potential motions for dismissal that could leave the case tied up for months or even years. Merchan still has to rule on Trump’s argument that his status as president was a “legal impediment” to further criminal proceedings and the case should be dismissed as a result.

Trump has yet to be sentenced following his May conviction. Prosecutors have already agreed the president-elect would not be sentenced while he is in office, but the district attorney’s office has argued in legal filings that the felony conviction should still stand. Prosecutors wrote that while the sentence could be delayed or modified, dismissing a jury’s conviction altogether would be an unwarranted “extreme remedy.”

Trump was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records over payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to reimburse a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels, in order to keep her from speaking out about an alleged affair before the 2016 election. Trump has denied the affair.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-rules-trump-does-not-000503038.html

View attachment 37962
just more lawfare bullshit. It will all come to nothing just like democrats
 
Donald Trump’s felony conviction in the New York hush money case should not be tossed out because of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, Judge Juan Merchan ruled Monday.

Merchan’s decision rejected one of several avenues that Trump’s lawyers have taken to try to dismiss Trump’s May guilty verdict on 34 counts of falsifying business records. The judge did not, however, rule on a motion from Trump’s attorneys to dismiss the conviction because Trump has now been elected president.

Instead, his 41-page decision focused on the question of presidential immunity.

Merchan wrote the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump should receive broad immunity for official acts during his time in office did not mean the conviction should be dismissed, ruling that the evidence presented by the Manhattan district attorney’s office was not related to Trump’s official conduct as president.

The evidence contested by Trump’s lawyers, the judge wrote, related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and should receive no immunity protections.

“This Court concludes that if error occurred regarding the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan wrote. “Even if this Court did find that the disputed evidence constitutes official acts under the auspices of the Trump decision, which it does not, Defendant’s motion is still denied as introduction of the disputed evidence constitutes harmless error and no mode of proceedings error has taken place.”

Trump transition spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement that Merchan’s decision “is a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity, and other longstanding jurisprudence.”

Trump’s lawyers are likely to appeal Merchan’s decision, one of several potential motions for dismissal that could leave the case tied up for months or even years. Merchan still has to rule on Trump’s argument that his status as president was a “legal impediment” to further criminal proceedings and the case should be dismissed as a result.

Trump has yet to be sentenced following his May conviction. Prosecutors have already agreed the president-elect would not be sentenced while he is in office, but the district attorney’s office has argued in legal filings that the felony conviction should still stand. Prosecutors wrote that while the sentence could be delayed or modified, dismissing a jury’s conviction altogether would be an unwarranted “extreme remedy.”

Trump was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records over payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to reimburse a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels, in order to keep her from speaking out about an alleged affair before the 2016 election. Trump has denied the affair.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-rules-trump-does-not-000503038.html

View attachment 37962
Fuck you asshole. You supported the assassination of your president elect so, fuck you!
 
If you did what Trump was found guilty of doing, you would be looking through bars. He was found guilty of 34 felonies by a jury of peers,.Trump bleats that he is being picked on, yet this is another example of his special treatment.
 
If you did what Trump was found guilty of doing, you would be looking through bars. He was found guilty of 34 felonies by a jury of peers,.Trump bleats that he is being picked on, yet this is another example of his special treatment.
NO ONE has ever been found guilty of what Trump did because Bragg just made up the law and a corrupt judge made sure of an illegal conviction.

:magagrin:
 
If no one has ever been found guilty of the law then why have over 30 people been tried and convicted for breaking the law you say now one has ever been found guilty of?

So was their law extended to a felony based on a suppose violation of Federal election laws that Bragg has ZERO authority to enforce? Laws that Trump never broke? If so please feel free to link us up to. Otherwise shut up because your moronic posts make everyone dumber.
 
Does anyone really care about this circus? The people have spoken. Not guilty.

All I'm interested in is seeing merchan swatted and denied bail what with all those conspiracies against rights he's been committing.
 
So was their law extended to a felony based on a suppose violation of Federal election laws that Bragg has ZERO authority to enforce? Laws that Trump never broke? If so please feel free to link us up to. Otherwise shut up because your moronic posts make everyone dumber.
Oh.. Next you will demanding that they person was also named Trump.

You do realize that states have election laws as well. Which law did the jury find that Trump violated that made it a felony? Until you can show that the jury relied on a Federal election law to make it a state felony your argument is nothing but bullshit.
 
Does anyone really care about this circus? The people have spoken. Not guilty.

All I'm interested in is seeing merchan swatted and denied bail what with all those conspiracies against rights he's been committing.
If Merchan is swatted, he will not have committed a crime. The person that swatted him would be the one committing a crime.

A judge holding a trial is not illegal. A judge issuing a ruling is not illegal since all rulings can be appealed.
If the USSC doesn't overturn the case will you be demanding that all the Supreme Court Justices be jailed?
 
If Merchan is swatted, he will not have committed a crime.
Well crimes appear to be in the eye of the beholder these days.


A judge holding a trial is not illegal.
If the so called trial is a conspiracy against rights it is, that's the story I'm sticking with. Golden rule and all.


A judge issuing a ruling is not illegal since all rulings can be appealed.
A stolen car can be returned, but it was still stolen and that was still a crime.


If the USSC doesn't overturn the case will you be demanding that all the Supreme Court Justices be jailed?
Nobody is above the law, remember?
 
The Convicted felon President, how they will describe him in the History Books.
If you were a real lawyer you would know Trump isn't a convicted felon until the verdict is entered by the Judge. That is why it was important to pardon Hunter BEFORE he was sentenced and the verdict was entered by the Judge. Trump is not a convicted felon.
 
If Merchan is swatted, he will not have committed a crime. The person that swatted him would be the one committing a crime.

A judge holding a trial is not illegal. A judge issuing a ruling is not illegal since all rulings can be appealed.
If the USSC doesn't overturn the case will you be demanding that all the Supreme Court Justices be jailed?
Conspiracy to interfere with an election is a crime.
 
Well crimes appear to be in the eye of the beholder these days.



If the so called trial is a conspiracy against rights it is, that's the story I'm sticking with. Golden rule and all.



A stolen car can be returned, but it was still stolen and that was still a crime.



Nobody is above the law, remember?
Crimes are in the eye of the legal system where a grand jury of citizens have to indict. A judge oversees the case and gives the defendant the benefit of the doubt. A defendant is allowed to have a defense lawyer and present his defense. A jury that has sworn to be unbiased hears the case and then has to decide guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A higher court will then hear any appeals as to whether the lower court did anything wrong.

The fact that you don't understand how the courts actually work in the US points to you not being a very responsible citizen.
 
Crimes are in the eye of the legal system where a grand jury of citizens have to indict.
Uh huh, no abuse is possible so there is nothing to worry about *grins evily and wrings hands*


A judge oversees the case and gives the defendant the benefit of the doubt.


The fact that you don't understand how the courts actually work in the US points to you not being a very responsible citizen.
I understand, I despise the corruption thereof and laugh at the notion that anything but derision and scorn are owed by me to the filthy vermin calling themselves judges, prosecutors, and jurors who conspired to undermine American democracy and simultaneously make a mockery of the law with their inane despicable transparent lies.

As a responsible citizen and a rational ethical human being I will not pretend that a rotted out tool of tyrants has anything to do with a social contract empowered by the consent of the governed.
 
Back
Top