The investigating judge of the case against Donald Trumpaccused of buying the silence of the former porn film actress Stormy Daniels, delayed until Nov. 19 its decision on the defense’s motion to dismiss the case.
“The joint request for the suspension of the current deadlines (…) until November 19 is granted,” states an email between the parties released by the Manhattan Supreme Court regarding the only one of the judicial fronts opened against the now president. elected who sat him on the bench.
A popular jury found Trump guilty in May of 34 counts of “aggravated accounting falsification” in the payment of $130,000 to the former actress to buy her silence about an alleged extramarital affair in 2006, which the magnate has always denied.
That payment was made in 2016, in the final stretch of the electoral campaign that took him to the White House for the first time.
Trump’s defense had asked Judge Juan Merchan before the election to dismiss the case in light of the Supreme Court ruling granting former presidents immunity for official acts.
After the Republican’s overwhelming victory in the November 5 elections, the prosecution now needs more time to evaluate the next steps in an unprecedented situation.
The judge of Colombian origin had planned to announce on November 26 the sentence he was going to impose on the first former president of the United States to sit on the bench, after delaying it on two occasions.
For now, the judicial future of the president-elect remains up in the air.
If Merchan dismisses the case, there will be no sentence against Trump, which would undoubtedly be a victory for the 78-year-old magnate.
If he does not do so, it seems unlikely that he will be sentenced to prison since his legal team would appeal the decision and interfere with Trump’s role as president when he takes office on January 20.
“The execution of the sentence, whether jail, house arrest, work of general interest or a fine, will have to wait until the appeals are resolved and Trump (whose term will end in 2029) is not in office,” wrote the former prosecutor. Randall Eliason on his blog.
Donald Trump has reiterated that his problems with justice are a “witch hunt” with political motivations.
“Unthinkable”
A recent Kansas City Star editorial called on Merchan to “do what was previously unthinkable: force an elected president to take the oath of office from a jail cell.”
“The surreal scene, although certainly shocking to witness for the rest of the free world, would send an unmistakable message: the rule of law remains in force in the United States,” the newspaper reported.
His lawyers have done everything possible to quash the New York process and delay beyond 2024 three other criminal proceedings related to the Republican’s alleged attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election and the withholding of classified documents after he left the White House.
After his overwhelming victory on November 5, special prosecutor Jack Smith, appointed to investigate his legal problems, and the Department of Justice began discussions to “determine the course to follow” in the face of the “unprecedented situation” that his election has generated.
Smith has promised to announce the outcome of the deliberations by December 2.
Most legal analysts expect Trump will benefit from the policy that protects sitting presidents, allowing him to avoid federal cases against him until the end of his term.
When he returns to the White House, Trump will appoint an attorney general who will undoubtedly remove Jack Smith or simply order his department to drop the cases against him.
LDAV
Related
What are the potential implications of the New York Supreme Court’s delay in deciding Trump’s defense motion regarding the Stormy Daniels case?
Time.news Interview: Between Justice and Politics
Interviewer (Time.news Editor): Good morning, and welcome to Time.news. Today, we have the privilege of speaking with legal expert and former prosecutor, Dr. Emily Martinez, who has been following the ongoing legal troubles of former President Donald Trump, particularly regarding the case involving Stormy Daniels. Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Martinez.
Dr. Emily Martinez: Good morning! It’s great to be here.
Interviewer: Let’s dive right into the latest developments. As reported, the New York Supreme Court has delayed its decision regarding Trump’s defense motion to dismiss the case until November 19. What does this delay indicate about the situation?
Dr. Martinez: The delay can be seen as a strategic move by the judge, indicating a need for careful consideration in an unprecedented legal situation. It reflects the complexities involved when dealing with a former president, especially given the charges he faces—34 counts of aggravated accounting falsification. This case is not only legally significant but also politically charged.
Interviewer: Absolutely. And we know that a popular jury found Trump guilty in May related to payment made to Stormy Daniels. How does this conviction and the context of the payment impact the current proceedings?
Dr. Martinez: The jury’s guilty verdict establishes a foundation that the prosecution can build upon. The $130,000 payment, aimed at buying silence regarding an alleged extramarital affair, becomes a central figure in the investigation. The fact it occurred during the 2016 campaign raises further questions about campaign finance violations. If the judge dismisses the case, it will mark a significant win for Trump. Conversely, a continued case could open up pathways for more severe consequences, although prison time seems unlikely at this stage due to the likely appeal process.
Interviewer: You mentioned the possibility of political implications. Trump has called these legal challenges a “witch hunt.” How does this sentiment play into public opinion and the legal process?
Dr. Martinez: Trump’s labeling of the situation as a “witch hunt” resonates strongly with his base, potentially influencing public opinion and voter sentiment. This framing can put pressure on the legal system, as it intertwines legality with politics. It’s essential for the judicial system to remain impartial, but in high-profile cases like this, the specter of political motivations can complicate proceedings.
Interviewer: The timeline is crucial here; Trump is expected to be inaugurated on January 20. If the judge decides against dismissal, how could that affect his presidency?
Dr. Martinez: If the case proceeds, Trump’s legal battles could create distractions from his presidential duties. However, as noted by legal experts, it’s likely that any execution of a sentence—whether it involves jail time or fines—would be delayed until after the appeals process. The critical element is that these issues could overshadow his presidency and affect his ability to lead effectively.
Interviewer: Looking ahead, what are the potential outcomes you foresee following the November 19 decision?
Dr. Martinez: If the judge dismisses the case, it could embolden Trump politically, igniting his narrative that he’s being unfairly targeted. However, if the case is not dismissed, we could be looking at months, if not longer, of legal battles that could involve appeals and further public scrutiny. We are in uncharted territory, and how this evolves will certainly set precedents for the intersection of law and politics in the future.
Interviewer: Thank you, Dr. Martinez, for sharing your insights on such a complex and evolving situation. We appreciate your expertise.
Dr. Martinez: Thank you for having me. It’s always a pleasure to discuss these critical issues.
Interviewer: And thank you to our viewers for tuning in. Stay with Time.news for the latest updates on this and other important stories as they develop.