Merchan Schedules Trump Sentencing for January 10
“Finding no legal impediment to sentencing and recognizing that Presidential immunity will likely attach once Defendant takes his Oath of Office, it is incumbent upon this Court to set this matter down for the imposition of sentence prior to January 20, 2025.”
New York Judge Juan Merchan set President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing for the criminal hush money case for January 10, ten days before the inauguration.
Finding no legal impediment to sentencing and recognizing that Presidential immunity will likely attach once Defendant takes his Oath of Office, it is incumbent upon this Court to set this matter down for the imposition of sentence prior to January 20, 2025. It is this Court’s firm belief that only by bringing finality to this matter will all three interests be served. A jury heard evidence for nearly seven weeks and pronounced its verdict; Defendant and the People were given every opportunity to address intervening decisions, to exhaust every possible motion in support of and in opposition to, their respective position in what is an unprecedented, and likely never to be repeated legal scenario. This Court must sentence Defendant within a reasonable time following verdict; and Defendant must be permitted to ava:l himself of every available appeal, a path he has made clear he intends to pursue but which only becomes fully available upon sentencing.
Merchan said it’s “proper at this juncture” to let everyone know that it’s the “Court’s inclination to not impose any sentence of incarceration, a sentence authorized by the conviction but one the People concede they no longer view as a practicable recommendation.”
“As such; in balancing the aforementioned considerations in conjunction with the underlying concerns of the Presidential immunity doctrine, a sentence of an unconditional discharge appears to be the most viable solution to ensure finality and allow Defendant to pursue his appellate options,” Merchan added.
In New York, an unconditional discharge means the court found someone committed the crime, but thinks a punishment doesn’t serve a purpose.
That means Trump won’t serve prison time, fine, or probation supervision.
However, it means Trump will be a felon.
Merchan did not dismiss the indictment, dismissing Trump’s claim he had “President-elect immunity.” He also dismissed Trump’s suggestion the Court do something akin to a ‘retroactive’ form of Presidential immunity, thus giving a defendant the ability to nullify verdicts lawfully rendered prior to a defendant being elected President by virtue of being elected President.”
The judge described accepting these arguments as an “abuse of discretion.”
“The Defendant has presented no valid argument to convince this Court otherwise,” wrte Merchan. “Binding precedent does not provide that an individual, upon becoming President, retroactively dismiss or vacate prior criminal acts nor does it grant blanket President-elect immunity.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Funding for New York from the federal government should be cancelled.
I think this is a good decision. Better get it done before he becomes President. .
Of course you do, JR. That way you can spam comment sections with “Trump is a convicted felon!11!!”.
More mush from the wimp.
By the way we have laws on the books that would immediately turn New York City from cultural powerhouse to irrelevant overnight by returning looted and stolen artwork to the rightful owners.
Perhaps instead of kissing the but of fascist New Yorkers we should enforce those.
There wouldn’t be a conversation if American heritage was stolen by Greece why is it controversial to send things belonging to Greece Americans stole to the rightful owner?
New York need a lot more illegals and a wall to keep them there until their deportations start, How about cutting them off from outside power? We need to be looking for ways to lesson their arrogance.
Because they don’t belong to Greece, and Americans didn’t steal them.
It seems like a pro-Trump position in that allows the case to be dismissed on appeal, where previously he’s been blocked from that.
Exactly. Had he just “stayed” it, Trump could not appeal.
Now PDT will be able to, All indications are that the New York appellate courts see that allowing this kind of blatant lawfare will chase business and capital out of NY very fast, to say nothing of the myriad instances of plain error that permeated the trial.
And what recourse does Merchan have if Trump doesn’t show up for sentencing?
Sending some sort of federal badge and gun agency to get him. Then, shoot him while he tries to escape.
wish your hypothesis could be dismissed outright–unfortunately their prophetic litany ” by any means necessary ” precludes it
cannot see the treasury boys (let alone his personal detail) allowing trump to be taken into custody by ANYONE
Oh, good.
I was afraid that I was going to miss out on CWII.
AFAIAC, there isn’t any validity to any of these trumped up lawfare cases against Trump.
Conversely, I see ample evidence that multiple leaders on the other side of the aisle that have engaged in serious felonies for which they should be locked up permanently.
Such imbalance cannot continue.
Let this rogue judge sentence Trump to prison. Let’s see how this works out.
Laughably obvious to anybody paying attention. This was always the plan.
Delay it as close to inauguration as possible, then try and throw him in jail to give the Democrats an excuse to try and prevent him from ever becoming President.
There’s zero actual legal justification to delay his sentencing for HOW many months now, other than it was politically helping Trump, only to now suddenly try to force a sentence.
Merchan never cared what the actual law was. He was only ever out to try and Get Trump.
It’s not to throw him in jail; Merchan said as my much. No, it’s to officially make him a convicted felon. Up until that time he has not been convicted, just solely found guilty by a jury. This has been their game since the election.
Sure. He promises. Pinky swear.
Prevent him how? Once the result is official on Monday, nothing short of his death in the intervening two weeks can prevent him becoming president. Certainly being thrown in jail can’t prevent it.
RICO case against all who participated in this lawfare. If there are no consequences to the lawlessness, it will be repeated.
This is just to give the news networks talking points to use against Trump.
Should we thank Merchan?
It’s a continuation of the same persecutorial stuff that helped Trump get elected.
Don’t we need them to show themselves for what they truly and fully are?
The further over the edge that they go, the more that normal people can see they need to be excluded from institutions that we are willing to live with.
Then we can get on with the business of eliminating criminals like Merchan from our institutions and our civil society. What they have is not a “civil” society.
Weird and sick people can live in those cesspools, but normal people simply can’t be ruled by New York type (or California type) civil institutions.
But, just wow, so horrible. It’s a direct line from Merchan to NY subway horrors and New Orleans attacks. That’s what they create.
Also, how is this not a criminal violation of 18 US 242, deprivation of rights under color of law?
The judge had obvious conflict of interest and should have recused, and venue should have been changed, and rogue rulings were made, and Bragg and DOJ conspired, and selective prosecution, and improper reliance on federal law… and now this…. Holy 3ffing smokes.
Since Trump must be at the sentencing, it gives assassins another opportunity of knowing exactly where he will be at a given time. Their next chance after that will be Jan 19, when Trump has its pre-inauguration rally in DC.
““A sentence of unconditional discharge appears to be the most viable solution to ensure finality and allow [Trump] to pursue his appellate options.”
So, Trump would be released without imprisonment, fines, or probation supervision.
But he would enter the Presidency as a felon.”
“But he would enter the Presidency as a felon.”
Which doesn’t really matter since there is no provision or part of the Constitution that forbids someone who has been convicted of a Felony from serving as president.
What this is all about is go ahead and sentence him, that way one of the loopy Dems in the house can file articles of impeachment, which will go nowhere. I mean 3rd times the charm right, it has worked so well for them in the past.
It gives the Dems/media a talking point they don’t deserve. It needs to be stayed, or delayed until after the inauguration.
Oh, I agree with that, but the outcome of the election pretty much shows that nobody cares.
“You can only push people so far!”..Sen Warren
On day one he can pardon himself
Nope, he was convicted of State crimes not Federal crimes. President can’t pardon for state convictions.
Well Merchan allowed his conviction to occur on the basis of a violation of federal campaign Finance law, as an element and for upgrading to a felony.
So Trump could potentially pardon himself since the prosecutor and the judge’s jury instructions alleged violation of federal campaign law..
Then let them go screw themselves and take it up to the Supreme Court where hopefully they could cut this idiotic gordian knot.
Merchan never specified which Federal law was violated
So. Who cares.. that’s the point.
Muck it up and use their misuse against them.
That would put the shoe on the other foot and definitely put it in federal court and ultimately the Supreme Court.
For the more not specifying which crime was a violation of his constitutional rights which is also a federal issue. And also puts the onus on Bragg and Merchan, to push it up hill against the federal government for once, with the feds on our side this time.
Furthermore, Bragg and Merchan cannot argue that federal law was irrelevant to this conviction. If it was then it was improper to bring it in. Furthermore if it was irrelevant then why did they bring it in. I think their backs are up against the wall in terms of whether they involved federal law. Hint… they did.
I think they were cooked by their own goose.
Why you being such a Negative Nelly by the way. Fight by the rules they established.
So? Trump doesn’t need to specify what federal crime he’s pardoning himself for. Two can play that game.
Indeed he can pardon himself for all federal crimes he may have committed his entire life until the day of the pardon. That would not affect this state crime at all.
No, he didn’t. There was no allegation that any federal law had been violated, and no such violation was an element in the charge for which he was convicted.
But even if it had been, a federal pardon could not affect the state charge. Even if he’d been pardoned before the state trial it would have made no difference.
Wrong! The added Federal violation was what allowed what would have been a misdemeanor ( False business records) to be elevated to a felony in that it was done to conceal another crime, in this case hiding a campaign contribution to himself, which again, isn’t actually an actual crime, according to the FEC
Are you trying to say that brag did not consistently reference potential violation of Federal Election Campaign Act 15 USC 30101 in his pleadings?
He must definitely did.
Are you saying that judge mershon did not include potential violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act in his jury instructions with a whole section on the Federal Election Campaign Act.?
He most certainly did.
He also referenced it in his indictment and referenced it significantly in the grand jury proceedings leading to an indictment.
Why do you always come here and foul up threads with lies and ignorance?
MarkS, you have it wrong. What you claim happened never did happen. PuttingOnItsShoes comes a little closer, but doesn’t seem to realize what he himself wrong. What you’re missing, and what he also seems to be missing despite having written it, is “potential violation”.
What supposedly raised the misdemeanor to a felony (and thus subject to a longer statute of limitations) was that the alleged falsification was done with an “intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof”. So no other crime need every have been committed. All that’s necessary is the intent to commit one, or the intent to conceal one should it ever be committed.
That’s why it was never necessary that he be charged with a federal offense. As far as this charge is concerned he might not ever have committed the “other offense”, so it can’t be necessary that he be charged with it, let alone convicted.
Of course the entire case was obvious bullshit. Even if Trump did everything alleged, there was still no crime committed.
Actually, no. He could only pardon himself on Convictions that were related to Federal Law. None of the convictions were for violating Federal Law, only state laws. So he couldn’t pardon himself from those convictions.
Just because the basis for the charges/convictions was a highly flawed and ludicrous legal theory doesn’t matter, that was actually the Judges job to toss this nonsense out, but that would take an impartial and uncompromised Judge, which we don’t have here. Only what he was convicted of matters.
On a side note I can’t wait for the appeals to lay out exactly how compromised the judge and DA were during this case.
This is a New York State crime. A US President can only pardon Federal miscreants.
Remember how on “Succession” Shiv would get contracts from politicians to get good press on her father’s News Network? Sound familiar?
Trump will only be a convicted felon until the appeals reverse it. Biden’s pardons of his family will ensure that hangs around their necks for the rest of their lives. Innocent people don’t get pardoned. Furthermore, being called to testify in court and other venues without Fifth Amendment protection may be fun.
That is not true.
It and the others were a one sided Kangaroo Court, t6here is never justice in these, only punishment to the opposition. It was a set up from the beginning to arrest Trump and get a conviction before the election if possible.
I’ve nort read the oder, but it is being reported that Trump can appear by video.
That would keep it from being a media circus outside the courthouse
Oh, it’s still going to be a media circus, just one or two rings instead of three, and a whole crowd of screeching leftists going into spasms.
I seem to recall that one night when I stumbled home at 2:30 am my wife called my pleading the fifth “an abuse of discretion.”
“As such; in balancing the aforementioned considerations in conjunction with the underlying concerns of the Presidential immunity doctrine, a sentence of an unconditional discharge appears to be the most viable solution to ensure finality and allow Defendant to pursue his appellate options,” Merchan added.
In New York, an unconditional discharge means the court found someone committed the crime, but thinks a punishment doesn’t serve a purpose.
So the Democrats have “convicted” Trump of a “crime” worthy of no punishment.
Why, then, is it a crime?
What a waste of taxpayer dollars.
An Unconditional Discharge is used in two instances. 1 where the judge feels the jury has made such a poor decision in spite of law or facts that it must be referred to appeal without bond or incarceration, or a fact has become evident after trial that is so important that the findings should be negated by further proceedings. ” What do you mean the murder victim is still alive? ”
In the instant case it is a desperate crooked judge and his daughter trying not to be charged with judicial misconduct for profit. An enormously serious crime where 2o to 40 year sentences are not uncommon…. Outside of blue states.
Both New York cases were about nothing more than the election. This one because they thought branding Trump as a felon would cause people to not vote for him. The fraud case was to drain his campaign money. Both should have been dismissed as soon as he was elected but that would have made it obvious to even the people who say the cases are legitimate so both will be overturned on appeal. In the fraud case the appeals court is asking things like Why do the supposed victims want to do more business with Trump? How is this fraud when no one lost any money? Why did the victims testify on behalf of the defense instead of the prosecution? Why is Trump the only person in history you have ever even attempted to use the law this way on? If the NY AG was smart she would just say you are right it was all a mistake but she is continuing to push it even though everyone watching the appeal thinks it will be tossed. If this case makes it to an appeals court, well the judges daughter was making money off trying to make Trump lose the election. That alone sounds like a severe conflict of interest and he should have recused himself. Clarence Thomas accepted gifts from someone who had no cases before the court and they said he should resign over it but this guy’s family makes money over Trump being convicted and it is ok for him to stay on the case?
She made no money off his being convicted. Her income would be exactly the same whether he was convicted or acquitted.
You’ve nailed the key vulnerability in Bragg’s case: the reliance on federal law, even if partial, opens the door to federal preemption arguments, making the conviction extremely vulnerable to being vacated in federal court.
Bragg’s decision to introduce federal campaign finance law into the case, particularly as an underpinning for the statute of limitations extension, felony elevation, and jury instructions, has likely backfired, creating a clear preemption risk that could provide an “escape hatch” for federal courts to vacate the conviction on narrow, existing doctrine (federal preemption) without creating new constitutional precedents.
Let’s break down why Bragg likely made this decision, what he miscalculated, and why federal preemption doctrine provides an easy way out for the courts.
—
Why Did Bragg Rely on Federal Law?
Bragg had a weak case under New York law alone, and his reliance on federal law appears to have been strategic to address several problems:
1. Extending the Statute of Limitations
New York’s statute of limitations for falsifying business records is typically five years for a felony.
The alleged conduct occurred in 2016-2017, meaning the statute had expired by the time Bragg brought the case.
Bragg used federal campaign finance violations to argue that Trump’s actions constituted ongoing criminal conduct, allowing him to toll the statute of limitations.
2. Elevating the Charge to a Felony
Under New York law, falsifying business records is typically a misdemeanor unless it is done to conceal another crime.
Bragg relied on federal campaign finance law as the “other crime” Trump was allegedly concealing, thereby elevating the charge to a felony.
3. Securing the Conviction
The jury instructions allowed the jury to convict Trump if they found that he falsified records to cover up a violation of federal law, specifically federal campaign finance violations.
—
What Was Bragg’s Miscalculation?
Bragg miscalculated the preemption risks associated with relying on federal law in a state prosecution. Here’s why:
1. Federal Campaign Finance Law Is Exclusively Federal
Campaign finance law is governed by the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Courts have held that federal campaign finance law preempts state laws in this area, meaning that states cannot prosecute violations of federal campaign finance law.
2. Federal Agencies Declined to Prosecute
Both the FEC and the DOJ declined to prosecute Trump for campaign finance violations, making Bragg’s reliance on those violations even more problematic.
Trump’s lawyers can argue that New York had no authority to prosecute a crime that federal agencies declined to pursue.
3. Preemption Doctrine Is Well-Established
Federal preemption doctrine holds that federal law supersedes state law in areas where Congress intended federal law to be exclusive.
Campaign finance law is one of those areas.
—
How a Court Could Vacate the Conviction on Preemption Grounds
A federal court could rule as follows:
1. Federal Campaign Finance Law Preempts State Prosecution
The court could find that Bragg improperly relied on federal law, which is exclusively governed by federal agencies.
2. New York’s Use of Federal Law Was Improper
The court could rule that Bragg’s use of federal law to extend the statute of limitations, elevate the charge to a felony, and secure a conviction was improper under preemption doctrine.
3. Vacate the Conviction
Based on the preemption issue, the court could vacate the conviction without addressing thorny constitutional issues like self-pardons or executive immunity.
—
Why Vacating on Preemption Grounds Would Be a “Clean” Solution
Federal courts, especially the Supreme Court, prefer to resolve cases on narrow legal grounds to avoid unnecessary constitutional rulings. A preemption-based ruling would be:
1. Grounded in Existing Doctrine
Federal preemption is a well-established legal principle.
A ruling based on preemption would not create new precedent or upend existing law.
2. Avoids Messy Constitutional Issues
By focusing on preemption, the court could sidestep questions about:
The president’s pardon power.
The legality of self-pardons.
Executive immunity.
3. Politically Neutral
A preemption-based ruling would appear legally principled rather than politically motivated, reducing the risk of public backlash.
—
Summary: The Preemption Trap Bragg Created for Himself
—
Final Thoughts: Bragg’s Strategic Misstep
Bragg’s reliance on federal law was likely a strategic choice to strengthen a weak case under New York law, but it has backfired by creating a federal preemption vulnerability. This vulnerability gives Trump a plausible legal pathway to challenge the conviction in federal court, and a federal court could vacate the conviction on preemption grounds without addressing more politically explosive constitutional issues.
The most likely outcome is that federal courts (including the Supreme Court) would prefer to vacate the conviction on narrow preemption grounds, avoiding a constitutional crisis while reinforcing the principle that states cannot enforce federal law.
In retrospect, Bragg’s case was always walking a fine line, and the reliance on federal law now appears to be the fatal flaw that Trump could exploit.
Banana republic-level bull crap!!!!!!!!
you see where the sh!tstain want MArchand disbarred? How many times does he prove how unfit for office he is?
Could you say that again, in English this time if you please. 🙂
Shut up, Johnny.
Leave a Comment