How many members of his extended campaign team are felons with whom he is technically barred from interacting, and how many microscopic fragments of effort has he made to avoid interacting with them?
You don’t understand why Justice Merchan isn’t violating him on these minor matters, do you?
If Trump is violated before sentencing, he’s just got another issue on appeal to delay the sentencing further. Once sentencing has taken place, it’s a different kettle of fish. If Trump violates his probation terms after sentencing, no more appeals.
I guess I’m just far more cynical than you about Trump making a conscientious effort to distance himself from Peter Navarro (who spoke at the RNC) and similar types in order to play nice. I see Trump deliberately thumbing his nose at the court and daring the judge to do something about these “minor” matters.
That’s exactly what Trump is doing, hoping that Merchan will violate his probation so Trump has an excuse to take the case again to a higher court and delay the sentencing further. Justice Merchan is far too experienced to fall for that bullshit.
He’ll wait until he sentences Trump. And then Merchan will own him if Trump violates his probation. Bet you won’t see Trump standing next to any felon after he’s sentenced.
I would not hesitate to take that bet if it weren’t against board rules.
Poor choice of words on my part.
I don’t think Merchan would hesitate to have Trump violated if he does. After sentencing, though.
ETA: Navarro was convicted of misdemeanor contempt. He’s not a felon.
I think this is a reasonable stance. For the most part, Trump has not only gotten away with flouting norms his entire life he has often been rewarded for it. I think a lot of Trump’s actions are coming back to bite him in the butt now, but it’s tough to break a lifelong habit.
Well, so far, no one has offered any legitimate “minor matters” where Trump has actually violated his probation. Ever since Justice Merchan made it clear that he would take Trump into custody for violations, I can’t think of a single instance where he’s actually crossed a line. Can you?
It wont make any difference. trump will appeal, in in general in NY you get to be out on bail while your first appeal is pending. So even if Marchant says “34 consecutive one year terms” it will not directly- impact trumps campaign. Altho with that looming over him, it will have an impact of course.
Standard in NY for non violent offenders is to tay out on bail until then. Mind you, the Judge could impose restrictions such as “no fraternizing with known felons”…
As i said above and several times in this thread- no, trump will be out on bail until the first appeal is heard.
I suspect the sentence will be something like one year supervised house arrest and 3 years suspended sentence.
I expect Trump to be sentenced to either a year in jail or perhaps two-three years of prison. I also expect Trump to remain free on bail during the inevitable appeal. I’m fine with that.
sentencing will be november 26th 2024.
< High-fives @Moriarty >
nov. 12th will be the decision on the request by team trump to reverse the conviction and dismiss the case due to presidential immunity.
on tuesday the federal judge rejected team trump’s request on moving the case to federal court. an appeal to that decision is pending.
Another mulligan in a lifetime of mulligans.
Trump is above the law.
Unbefuckinglievable.
There goes the last shot to have Trump suffer any legal consequences whatsover for any of his obvious crimes before this election.
He should have been in an orange jumpsuit three and a half years ago.
If the 34 felony convictions didn’t matter, a nominal jail sentence isn’t going to, either. But imposing a nominal jail sentence before the election could well have enraged enough lukewarm Trump supporters who were otherwise going to sit on their ass this election to come out and vote as a protest against his “unfair” treatment.
I’m also going to speculate that Justice Merchan is fairly confident in the outcome of the upcoming election.
I don’t disagree that Trump should have been in an orange jumpsuit three and a half years ago, but there have been many unforeseeable turns of events that have allowed him to dodge responsibility. He certainly does enjoy advantages that no one else does – like a corrupt SCOTUS that is willing to run interference for him.
I think that is implicit, in fact all but explicit in some of the judge’s commentary I’ve read online:
Merchan noted the upcoming presidential election in his decision to delay sentencing, saying that part of his reason for doing so was to avoid the appearance that the sentencing was intended to influence the November election.
“Adjourning decision on the motion and sentencing, if such is required, should dispel any suggestion that the Court will have issued any decision or imposed sentence either to give an advantage to, or to create a disadvantage for, any political party and or any candidate for any office,” Merchan wrote.
He, opposite of our SCOTUS, is explicitly avoiding even the appearance of conflict of interest (eyeballing you Alito and Thomas!!!) by allowing the delay.
I am of many minds about it. Overall… I’m 60/40 in favor of this move. Prior to our changeover in candidates… not so sure. But not giving Trump new fuel to rant about is probably (
) more helpful in terms of the election than any of the likely sentences he would have been given.
There’s a difference between voting for someone with 34 felony convictions and voting for someone who’s actually in jail. (Although, as has been explained, even if sentenced to jail he wouldn’t actually be in jail.)
Really? Can I smoke what he’s smoking?
Oh good – more “when they go low, we go high.” Wake me up when it works.
Eh, as I said, I think like @Aspenglow it’s the moral high ground AND reasonably accurate political judgment, so a two-fer. And it undercuts his claims on all future appeals that his convictions are completely political.
Again, I don’t think sentencing him to jail or house arrest (which IMHO wouldn’t have been carried out until after the election anyway) would have moved the needle on his supporters, and it MIGHT have brought out a few more people to vote on his behalf that are otherwise no longer enthusiastic but voting their habits or prejudice.
I think it’s more likely voters would have been more reluctant to vote for someone who’s actually been sentenced to jail time. But I guess we’ll never know now.