Following a Manhattan jury’s May conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records, President-elect Trump’s sentencing has been indefinitely postponed. His legal team’s motion to dismiss the hush-money case, arguing for presidential immunity, is currently under consideration by the judge. This postponement cancels the previously scheduled sentencing and allows the defense to pursue dismissal. The case, stemming from payments made to Stormy Daniels, is now stalled pending the outcome of the dismissal motion.
Read More
Manhattan prosecutors oppose dismissing President-elect Trump’s hush money conviction, but suggest delaying sentencing until after his second term to balance constitutional interests. While acknowledging the unique legal questions raised by his presidency, they maintain the conviction’s validity. Trump’s legal team, however, claims this is a victory and seeks a complete dismissal, citing the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity. The judge will ultimately decide whether to dismiss the case, delay it, or proceed with sentencing.
Read More
My Supreme Court victory in *Trump v. United States* secured a historic win on presidential immunity, crucial in countering the “lawfare” attacks against me and the MAGA movement. During arguments, I successfully argued for broad presidential immunity, even extending to hypothetical scenarios involving actions such as assassinations. While acknowledging hypotheticals, my position maintained that such actions, if deemed “official acts,” would fall under this immunity. This ruling is a key defense against politically motivated legal challenges.
Read More
Mark Meadows’ attempt to move his Georgia election interference case to federal court was unsuccessful, as the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against him based on his current lack of federal employment and the unrelated nature of the charges to his former duties. While Trump’s reelection may impact the prosecution of his co-defendants, his own case is likely on hold or dismissed due to presidential immunity. The Georgia Court of Appeals is set to hear arguments on December 5 regarding Trump’s request to remove District Attorney Fani Willis from the case, but this schedule could change following his victory.
Read More
Judge Juan Merchan has postponed his decision on whether to dismiss Donald Trump’s conviction on presidential immunity grounds until November 19th, following requests for a postponement from both the defense and prosecution. The delay comes after Trump, who was convicted of falsifying business records in a scheme to influence the 2016 election, was elected President of the United States. This decision raises unprecedented legal questions about the impact of Trump’s presidency on his ongoing criminal case, as prosecutors and defense attorneys grapple with the potential implications of Trump’s new role on the proceedings.
Read More
In a recent interview with The New York Times, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sharply criticized the Supreme Court for its decision granting presumptive immunity to former presidents, calling the ruling an “embarrassment to our founders.” Pelosi argued that the court’s decision undermines justice and creates an environment where presidents are above the law. Although she acknowledged her differences with former President Donald Trump, she framed her criticism as a broader concern about institutional integrity. Pelosi also suggested that the timing of President Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential race may have impacted the Democratic primary, potentially allowing for a stronger candidate to emerge.
Read More
President-elect Donald Trump’s legal battles face a dramatically altered landscape following his electoral victory. Experts predict that his federal cases, already in jeopardy due to legal challenges and Supreme Court rulings, will likely be dismissed due to the long-standing practice of not criminally prosecuting a sitting president. Similarly, the Georgia case, while less certain, is expected to be either paused or dismissed, likely due to the statute of limitations expiring. While Trump’s New York sentencing is scheduled for late November, experts expect the outcome to be a mere financial penalty, with a prison sentence highly unlikely given the nature of the charges and the impracticality of imprisoning a president with Secret Service protection.
Read More
It’s mind-boggling to think that we are even having a debate about whether a sitting president is entitled to immunity for blatantly trying to subvert the democratic process. Overturning an election, a hush money fraud, sexual assault, or any other criminal activity are certainly not part of the presidential duties we were all taught in civics class. It seems pretty cut and dry that the duties of the President do not include attempting to overthrow the government that they were elected to lead.
This recent revelation by Special Counsel Jack Smith, highlighting Trump’s private criminal effort to overturn the 2020 election results, underscores the importance of holding our elected leaders accountable for their actions.… Continue reading
Jack Smith is on a mission to reveal the truth about Trump’s alleged criminal activities, and that’s a mission that deserves our attention. In a recent court filing, Smith argued against Trump’s presidential immunity, which has been a contentious issue since the Supreme Court’s decision in July. This filing marks a significant step forward in Smith’s case against Trump, and it sheds light on the complex legal battle that is unfolding.
It’s fascinating to see the lengths to which both parties are going to present their arguments. Smith’s document was filed under seal to protect sensitive information, while Trump’s attorneys are pushing for redacted filings.… Continue reading
When I first heard about the Special Counsel filing a reworked indictment against Donald Trump in the January 6th case, I wasn’t surprised, but I was definitely intrigued. The fact that the indictment has been updated in light of the Supreme Court ruling that presidents have immunity for official duties is a clear indication that this case is far from over. The new indictment highlights that Trump had no official responsibilities related to the certification process but had a personal interest in being named the winner of the election, a crucial distinction that sets the stage for a more focused legal battle.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker