# Manhattan Prosecutors file criminal charges for Trump re Stormy Daniels case - ongoing discussion here (Guilty on all 34 counts, May 30, 2024) **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [March 9, 2023, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953 "2023-03-09T22:53:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 308
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6141 "2024-07-02T18:55:42Z")
september 18! that is the new date for sentencing. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6142 "2024-07-02T18:55:45Z")
I’ve read that the SCOTUS ruling really could jeopardize this verdict – because some of the evidence came from while Trump was president, and therefore could be covered by the “official acts” stuff (i.e. talking to his advisors or whatever). If this is accurate, it’s absolutely IMPERATIVE that Judge Merchan force SCOTUS to rule or overturn the verdict, he should absolutely not do it for them. Merchan needs to find some interpretation or way to rule to NOT set aside the verdict, and move to sentencing, even if he thinks it will be subsequently overturned. It’s ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE that the headlines be (if the verdict is ultimately nullified) “SCOTUS OVERTURNS TRUMP GUILTY VERDICT”, rather than “JUDGE MERCHAN SETS ASIDE TRUMP GUILTY VERDICT”. EDIT: Fixed judge’s name. ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6143 "2024-07-02T18:56:24Z")
the judge is merchan in the manhattan case. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6144 "2024-07-02T18:57:28Z")
Thanks, fixed. ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6145 "2024-07-02T18:59:59Z")
it gets confusing. 4 judges no waiting. oh wait, there is a second date sept. 6. ah, ruling to be on the 6th and sentencing on the 18th. things are moving fast on msnbc. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6146 "2024-07-02T19:16:27Z")
It’s official: > ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6147 "2024-07-02T19:19:57Z")
Is anyone else tired of evil winning, like I am? ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Knig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@Typo\_Knig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Knig)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2024, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6148 "2024-07-03T00:55:18Z")
And tired of Trump getting every possible break. ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2024, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6149 "2024-07-03T02:46:20Z")
Just tired of Trump period, actually. Good or bad, he always seems to dominate the news. Which is exactly what he wants actually. It’s like that Fall Out Boy song: I don’t care what you think As long as it’s about me ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6150 "2024-07-06T16:53:53Z")
> **[Stormy Daniels gets more than $900,000 from GoFundMe after alleged threats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/06/stormy-daniels-gofundme-alleged-threats-)** > > Daniels says Trump supporters have inundated her with threats to rape and murder her daughter and other family ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6151 "2024-07-06T17:54:24Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > > [@rocking\_chair](#): > > > > Trump is attempting to get his conviction vacated due to today’s ruling. > > LOL- it was hardly an official act. I understand the SC ruling to be that if a president says it’s an official act, then it IS. And nobody may question his motivations. Of course, this only applies to Trump, as I’m sure if Biden tries anything they will rule the opposite. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6152 "2024-07-06T18:03:35Z")
No, they said there must be preliminary evidentiary hearings to determine what’s official or not, and by extension, what’s admissible. It has cluster@#$& written all over it. ETA: For acts conducted within his core constitutional powers, his motivations are no concern for the courts. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6153 "2024-07-06T18:09:13Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > I understand the SC ruling to be that if a president says it’s an official act, then it IS. And nobody may question his motivations. But all of the Stormy stuff, both sleeping with her and paying her off, happened before he was president, so that should fall, unquestionably, outside the scope of the ruling, right? ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6154 "2024-07-06T18:19:39Z")
The pundits I’ve heard say that the charge would withstand review, but potentially some of the evidence used in the trial could be deemed inadmissible (e.g., certain texts). If any was determined to be inadmissible, the judge would have to decide if the remaining evidence was sufficient to support a guilty verdict. If not, new trial. Said pundits say this does not necessarily make a successful appeal likely, but the defense does now have bullets in their gun they did not previously. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6155 "2024-07-06T18:43:44Z")
Doesn’t this get back to the whole objecting for the record thing, though? Legal-type folks tell us that if something hinky happens during a trial, the attorneys have to object to it right away, because if they don’t, it makes it very difficult to appeal on that grounds later. Which makes sense, because otherwise, you get questions like “Well, what would the jury have decided, if they didn’t have that testimony?”. Did any of Trump’s lawyers object to the testimony on the grounds that it was subject to Presidential immunity? ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6156 "2024-07-06T19:04:54Z")
Not sure, and it’s a good question. But if the pundits I heard (who are all lawyers with impressive pedigrees) are on the right track, they didn’t mention that as an obstacle. ---
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6157 "2024-07-06T19:43:57Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Did any of Trump’s lawyers object to the testimony on the grounds that it was subject to Presidential immunity? My “IANAL” hunch is that they couldn’t have raised an objection (or used Presidential immunity as an affirmative defense), at trial, based on an issue that hadn’t _yet_ been adjudicated by the SCOTUS. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6158 "2024-07-06T19:46:02Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > I understand the SC ruling to be that if a president says it’s an official act, then it IS. That is not true at all. > [@Joey\_P](#): > > But all of the Stormy stuff, both sleeping with her and paying her off, happened before he was president, so that should fall, unquestionably, outside the scope of the ruling, right? That is what legal experts say. The issue is the Georgia case. Is interfering in an election an “official act”? I think SCOTUS will say no, but it depends on what the evidence it. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6159 "2024-07-06T19:53:34Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > The issue is the Georgia case. Is interfering in an election an “official act”? I don’t see how it could be an official act, given that he wasn’t an official at that point. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2024, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953/6160 "2024-07-06T19:53:49Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > The issue is the Georgia case. Is interfering in an election an “official act”? I think SCOTUS will say no, but it depends on what the evidence it. My prediction: If Trump loses the election, the SC will say “no” If Trump wins the election , the SC will say “yes, official act”. In this case, Trump will move to eliminate his political opponents. Welcome to the one party state. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953.md?page=307) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manhattan-prosecutors-file-criminal-charges-for-trump-re-stormy-daniels-case-ongoing-discussion-here-guilty-on-all-34-counts-may-30-2024/980953.md?page=309)