He wouldn’t be going to jail anyway (IMO, as explained in other threads, off-topic for this one), but maybe the judge can ignore the prosecutor’s request and impose an unusually harsh sentence. That would just leave things open to appeal.
Here’s one of many stories on the delay.
I don’t get this at all. This conviction was for felonies committed before Trump became president. How can the SCOTUS decision possibly imply any immunity for them?
ETA: Accidentally replied to one post instead of the general thread.
Before the latest anti-democracy decision I was in favor of simple house arrest, because of the logistics involved, but now the traitor needs to be even more tightly monitored.
They can’t house arrest him at Mara Lardo because zoning laws supposedly don’t allow a full time resident. And Trump Tower might be seized. Some token jail time would be nice, but what do you do with the fucker afterwards? No way he’s getting years. I say, take Trumpforce One to the far corner of some Airforce base, and let that be his home sweet home. Easy to make secure enough.
Technically, I don’t think they were. Trump was convicted of falsifying business records; recording his payments to Michael Cohen as legal retainer fees, rather than reimbursing Cohen for the money he paid to Stormy Daniels. Those payments to Cohen, and the false recording thereof, took place after Trump became president. it was even part of the trial testimony that the checks were delivered to Trump in the Oval Office for his signature.
Now, I can’t see any stretch of the imagination by which these could be considered official acts of his presidency. But I think there’s another catch. From what I’ve heard reported, the Supreme Court decision also placed limits on what testimony can be used against a president. The testimony about Trump signing checks, and some other details, came from Madeleine Westerhout, who was Trump’s secretary in the White House at the time. The Supreme Court decision may place her testimony, as an official employee, out of bounds.
Oooh, I like this.
I like it.
But I think the Feds could just say “No more Federal Funds for you”
I suppose NY could say “No more Federal Taxes to you”
We know who has the bigger stick here though.
Why in the hell did the prosecutors agree to this delay? Any ideas?
They’re willing to allow time for the court to review Trump’s claims that the SC ruling should wipe out the conviction.
I suspect that the judge will make short work of that review, though. It’s utterly meritless just on the basis that a lot of the crime happened before he was president. And covering up illegal payments related to personal conduct prior to the election can’t be “official acts”, if that term is to have any meaning what so ever. Particularly in this case, where they made great efforts to show that Cohen was acting as Trump’s personal attorney, and he quite explicitly had no role in government.
Yeah, paying off your hookers whether you are President or not is not an official act or the office.
I know they are trying to prevent an appeal from going through, but at some point, someone has to say, “Umm… NO”
Merchan probably wants this all done with, and he’s got to be sick of Trump and his lawyers ignoring him, engaging in all kinds of shenanigans, and making a mockery of the case. He’ll give it whatever tiny due it deserves and then proceed. I don’t think his hands are as tied as they would be if he was a federal judge.
Thanks for the explanation. Ignorance fought.
And FY, SCOTUS.
interesting, i believe the technicality to be on the other side. trump was inaug. in put into office in mid jan. the scheme was cemented and put into place before he took office.
the first few checks were signed by weisselberg and his son(s). the testimony that was given by white house staff spoke to how the personal checks got to trump and his motivation behind making the personal payments.
And the contempt charges we handed down long after he was POTUS, sentencing for those should ne handed down immediatly. No need to wait on an appeal, by all rights they should have been given during the trial.
Also, the actions he took post-election were merely a continuation of the criminal scheme he began before the election. If a president was dealing drugs prior to the election, does this mean he can continue to deal drugs throughout his term, with no repercussions?
the sentencing is now sept. 18th.
perhaps the drug dealing would move over to his physician…
Now I’m not sure what is better… For Trump to be incarcerated before nomination, forcing the Republicans to scramble for someone else (as if there was anyone else), or for him to be incarcerated once he’s the official nominee, just a couple of months before the voting starts.
After he’s the nominee. The party will never set him aside. He controls the party. Even if he’s in jail.
So then we can hope he is incarcerated, even as flimsy as that hope seems right now.
Maybe he is a giant behemoth roaming across the country.
(Yes I read your book.)
I don’t think Trump is going to be incarcerated, although he certainly should be. I think court shenanigans are going to delay it even farther or maybe even eliminate the sentencing.
So, I guess the date in the title should be changed to September 18, maybe with a “yeah, sure” added.