Okay, i can see that. Thank you! It just seems so stupid, I was sure I was missing something important that would make it all make sense. It’s obviously all over except for the appeals process at this point. I agree that sanctions should be in order over such an egregiously frivolous filing.
Trump’s lawyers argue that he is entitled
That might as well be their entire defense, for everything he’s ever done, ever.
Donald Trump is still claiming he won the last election. He would visit his golf clubs after a tournament, play a round, and then claim he won. It Trumpworld, nothing is over until Trump declares victory.
In light of the Supreme Court ruling on immunity for Presidential official acts, there is now considerable uncertainty about the possibility of criminal liability by a president. I don’t know that I would agree this is an egregiously frivolous filing. When the law changes as a result of a Supreme Court ruling, it creates uncertainty for litigants and courts.
As always, IANAUSL.
Which would call for an appeal, since the trial is already over. But I’m not any kind of lawyer, so that’s just my own sense of right and wrong talking.
Of course, he wasn’t President when he committed the crimes.
This is certainly true. However in this instance, AIUI based on what I’ve heard discussed by legal experts, there are two things that make it unlikely that Trump will succeed in his efforts:
-
He failed to raise the issue timely when the SCOTUS ruling came down. So basically, too late.
-
Trump made an almost identical motion prior to the SCOTUS ruling. The appeals court slapped it down quick and hard, saying something to the effect that in no sane world could Trump’s actions in this case be construed as official. The latest appeal is going before the same appellate court judge.
That ship has sailed, sadly.
Not according to the judge who issued the ruling, thankfully.
He was convicted of business fraud, for disguising the repayments to Cohen for the payoff. Most of the charges were based on acts that happened not long after Jan 20 2016. Perhaps he can argue that signing the fraudulent checks at the desk that he named the Resolute Desk made it an official act, or something.
The scheme may have been hatched before Trump’s inauguration, but most (maybe all) of the criminal acts, the repayments to Cohen and concealing them as a retainer, occurred while Trump was president. And some of the testimony in the trial was with other government employees who were serving in official capacities. I could see an argument that such testimony should not have been permitted under the SCOTUS immunity ruling for official acts.
I looked at the timeline of the charges, and the first payment was in January 2017, so it may have been before he was inaugurated, but I’m not certain.
So, same judge, likely same ruling, and I doubt this justice will sit on it for long.
That’s what I think.
Trump will of course appeal it to SCOTUS, and while they can be a real wild card (which is no doubt what @ThelmaLou was referring to), I just can’t see why they would take it up again. If they meant to protect Trump from stuff like this, they could have included the carveout in their wacky immunity ruling in the first place.
I’m still not convinced that SCOTUS is in the bag for Trump 100%. I think they’re in the bag for the Heritage Society. That overlaps into things that will help Trump but not always.
I wish they could just be real judges so we didn’t have to worry about this garbage and he could just serve his sentence like a normal felon.
Federalist Society, sorry.
Oh, this has been the goal for a very long time. Heritage Society, Federalist Society and others. They’ve finally got everything in place with their 3 new Justices, and now they’re going to rock and roll.
Citizens United:
McCutcheon:
We the People just let them get away with it.
I just hope that whatever their plans are, they don’t result in declaring that no former POTUS can be incarcerated or whatever.
I fully expect a carve out for Trump or any future President that fulfills their specific needs. Specifically, tying back to the limited immunity, they have IMHO declared that only they will be allowed to determine when and where such an immunity will apply. Oh, it won’t be specific to Trump, but it’ll be applied in a targeted, partisan manner.
The Manhattan case isn’t the case to watch. Whatever sentence Justice Merchan imposes, even if jail time is included, it’s going to be nothing much.
The cases to watch are the January 6th case before Judge Chutkan and the documents case before that sorry excuse for a judge, Judge Cannon.