But had no relationship to his official duties, unless writing hush money cheques is normally a part of presidential duties.
As has been already said, there is literally nothing in law defining what an official act of office is. The SCOTUS left that part out to decide later, if and when the issue comes back to them.
Common sense says you’re correct, but common sense also points out that there’s nothing in our law that gives the POTUS a special immunity from laws they break. The SCOTUS does whatever it feels like now.
Drat! Foiled again.
Went back and looked at polling during the trial and it seems his numbers took a dip following the conviction, but at the same time his fundraising increased.
Donald Trump Suffers Setback In Three Major Polls After His Guilty Verdict (yahoo.com)
as i understand it writing checks on a personal account is not a presidential duty.
the question comes in on the testimony of the white house personnel. would the conviction stand without their testimony? i believe that is the immunity ruling sticking point.
Well, now, let’s just wait for our overlords on the Supreme Court to pronounce for us ignorant yokels what is and isn’t a presidential duty, case by case. Lord knows we can’t be trusted with the knowledge to decide for ourselves.
They could just get some boilerplate stuff together:
IOKWARDI
(for the acronym-averse, “It’s OK When A Republican Does It”)
I seem to recall, many years ago, an argument was made to the effect that a particular grey-ethic action was taken to protect and preserve the dignity of the Office of President, because when the people lose respect for the President, it compromises the stability of the government itself. Individual-ONE may try to make a claim of this type, to suggest that he was writing these checks to prevent making The President look bad, and therefore it counts as an official duty, to protect the country from upheaval. Knowing what we do of this court, it might even fly. Which, of course, would mean that covering up the administration’s misdeeds is a thing that should be done and is entirely within the bounds of the law.
Unless, of course, a Democrat does it. Then they will find some way to discern that it is wrong wrong wrong.
No, but it is communication (between the Bank and to whomever the check is written). And, they have already decided that ‘all communications’ of the president are to have the presumption of an official communication. I’m guessing that means you would need independent evidence (that is other than other presumed official communications involving the president) to remove that presumption.
That entire decision is complete garbage, from start to finish.
going to make overturning it a bit easier some day…
one of those interesting curses. will it be congress that overturns it or will it be a future court?
Well we certainly know that is a check that his ass can’t cash.
That ship sailed with Nixon (despite efforts by Carter and Obama to course-correct). Biden’s been somewhat restorative, and maybe by the end of Harris’s second term, the term will be able to be used unironically again.
What am I missing here? The case is over. The jury returned a verdict and it’s all over except for the sentencing and appeals. Right?!
The motion for removal cites the Supreme Court’s ruling in July on presidential immunity from prosecution for official acts as the primary rationale for moving the case to federal court.
Delay, delay, delay.
I honestly don’t get it. Delay what? The trial is over. A verdict has been handed down. The only thing still outstanding about this trial is the sentencing. Do they want the federal court to do the sentencing instead? Is that even a thing?
I get that they’d MUCH rather have this be a federal conviction, because that can be pardoned by a sympathetic president now or in the future, while a state conviction can’t be. But they can’t retroactively turn this into a federal case. At least I can’t imagine that they can. All of the motions to remove to federal court have been denied. It’s too late. The fat lady is over in the corner doing vocal warm-ups in preparation for her big song.
None of the articles I’ve read on the subject address this extremely fundamental fact: the trial is complete (except for sentencing). I see nothing to remove. But they are reporting it like it’s a thing that could happen.
Delay so that the Trumper isn’t sentenced to jail before the election. Not a good look.
This is it. For all the talk that Merchan won’t sentence Trump to serve any time, Trump is worried this is exactly what will happen and it will hurt his chances at being elected.
The more confidant I am that he’s going to lose, the more I think it would be to his benefit to stop delaying things and start trying to wrap them up. If/When he loses the election, he’ll have virtually no political power and his empty promises will hold less weight. I think he’s going to find it more and more difficult to find sympathetic judges or lawyers or anyone that’s willing to put their career or social life on the line to help him.
ISTM he’s better off dealing with these cases while he can still convince the people that if they help him, he’ll help them.
Also, if/when he loses, I suspect he’ll quickly drop out of the headlines and no longer be a daily talking point. A lot of the benefits he’s been given throughout these trials are IMHO, at least in part, a response to that pressure, he’s going to be in for a reality check when he starts getting treated like a normal criminal that doesn’t wield the power to get a significant portion of the population whipped up into a frenzy with a single tweet.
I think the following paragraph in the article you linked to may be pertinent:
So perhaps, as you surmise, the motion for removal is out of order, and Trump’s lawyers are perfectly aware of this. They know that it’s going to be rejected, not on its merits but because it’s too late in the process to make such a filing. But until that formal rejection notice comes, the statute governing such motions requires Merchan to pause the proceedings. Merchan may know that the motion is obviously out of order, but he lacks the authority to rule on it, and is required by law to wait until those who do have the authority to make a ruling do so. Under this interpretation, Trump’s defence team is simply abusing process in order to delay sentencing. (And if it really is as egregious as I’ve made it out to be here, I wonder if Merchan could find Trump and/or his lawyers in contempt. Though I imagine there’d be a pretty high bar to proving that they acted in bad faith.)
I’d like not only to see the motion slapped down hard, but also to see Trump’s defense team sanctioned for filing frivolous motions that are obviously designed to do nothing but waste the court’s time.