Judge Rejects Trump’s Immunity Claim in Hush Money Case, Conviction Stands

[Social Media]

 

The legal battles surrounding Donald Trump have taken another turn as New York Justice Juan Merchan refused to dismiss the guilty verdict against the former president in his hush money case. Trump, who appears poised to reenter the White House, is likely to do so as the first convicted felon president, raising unprecedented legal and political questions.  

 

Trump’s attorneys had argued that his status as a president-elect granted him immunity from prosecution. They claimed the jury’s conviction — tied to falsified business records and payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels — should be overturned. However, Judge Merchan rejected the argument, emphasizing that the evidence of guilt was overwhelming and that the crimes were unrelated to presidential duties.

 

“If error occurred regarding the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan stated. The judge underscored that the evidence presented to the jury involved personal actions, not conduct tied to the presidency, and therefore was not protected by any form of immunity.  

 

The charges stem from a scheme to silence Daniels during Trump’s 2016 campaign. Her story of an alleged affair threatened to disrupt his political momentum, prompting his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to pay her $130,000. Trump’s reimbursement to Cohen was falsely recorded as legal expenses, leading to a jury convicting Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.  

 

Trump’s legal team has contended that his “overwhelming victory” in the presidential election and his role as a “soon-to-be sitting president” justify broader immunity protections. They also argued that the ongoing criminal proceedings could unconstitutionally distract from his forthcoming presidency. Despite these claims, Merchan made it clear that the law does not shield personal acts falling outside the scope of official presidential duties.  

 

“There is no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch in this case,” Merchan wrote, noting that Trump’s actions were not protected by the Supreme Court’s recent rulings on presidential immunity. While the Supreme Court granted absolute immunity for actions tied to official duties, it does not extend to personal misconduct outside the “outer perimeter” of presidential authority.  

 

Manhattan prosecutors, led by District Attorney Alvin Bragg, argued against dismissing the verdict or delaying sentencing indefinitely. They stated that “president-elect immunity does not exist” and warned against the extreme remedy of erasing the jury’s unanimous guilty verdict. Prosecutors suggested delaying sentencing until Trump’s presidency ends in 2029, reflecting the unusual circumstances of the case.  

 

This legal standoff places Trump in uncharted territory. While his attorneys seek to halt proceedings, it is increasingly likely he will assume office without facing immediate consequences for the convictions against him.  

 

Complicating matters further, special counsel Jack Smith has paused federal criminal investigations into Trump for now, and an appeals court in Georgia has delayed hearings on his election interference case. Nonetheless, the ongoing legal challenges cast a shadow over Trump’s potential return to the presidency, creating an unprecedented intersection of politics and criminal law.  

 

Based on a report by The Independent 2024-12-18

 

 

 

[jippytum]

As a trump supporter  i think these charges where politically motivated. However after having been found guilty i think the judges ruling not to overturn the verdict and the reasons for not doing so are correct. 

[JonnyF]

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

To answer your question, Trump cares.

[JonnyF]

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

To answer your question, Trump cares.

 

He'll take one for the team. 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

I’m sure he will, he’ll take a great deal.

 

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m sure he will, he’ll take a great deal.

 

 

Starting with Biden and Harris' reputation/soul. 

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

With trump there is no team, only me, myself and i. And he cares, unless you think he won't appeal?

[LosLobo]

35 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

And the team will pay the legal bills.....

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

And the team will pay the legal bills.....

 

The Dems shouldn't have tried to retain power with lawfare then.  

[newbee2022]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

Yeah, try to get a membership in his gangster gang already?

[JonnyF]

11 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Yeah, try to get a membership in his gangster gang already?

 

The only gangster gang was the Biden crime family, and they'll be gone soon once Joe has pardoned his crack addict gun toting prostitute using son Hunter (after promising not to).

 

[riclag]

51 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

We Americans have a history of 

lawlessness ! The founding fathers if captured would of been hanged for treason. What matters is the circumstances behind the lawfare,it was all by design, it was a Dem controlled conspiracy to bring Trump down! Americans will not accept a bias 

judge attempt to make mockery of the Constitution through malicious lawfare.

“When the 56 men signed the Declaration of Independence, they knew full well that they were committing treason against England and they knew the penalty—death”.

https://forestlawn.com/2018/07/02/56-and-treason-the-declaration-of-independence/
 

 

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, riclag said:

We Americans have a history of 

lawlessness ! The founding fathers if captured would of been hanged for treason. What matters is the circumstances behind the lawfare,it was all by design, it was a Dem controlled conspiracy to bring Trump down! Americans will not accept a bias 

judge attempt to make mockery of the Constitution through malicious lawfare.

“When the 56 men signed the Declaration of Independence, they knew full well that they were committing treason against England and they knew the penalty—death”.

https://forestlawn.com/2018/07/02/56-and-treason-the-declaration-of-independence/
 

 

 

I have great respect for the American people for seeing through the lies and machinations of the Democrats and re-electing Trump.

 

They have spoken, and Joe needs to get his lying derriere out of the white house ASAP. 

[Srikcir]

"Judge rules Trump’s conviction withstands Supreme Court immunity decision," (my bold)

by Zach Schonfeld and Ella Lee - 12/16/24 https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5043247-trump-hush-money-conviction-uphold/

"A New York judge upheld a jury’s verdict that convicted President-elect Trump of a felony, ruling the outcome of the hush money case can withstand the Supreme Court's new test for presidential immunity." (my italics)

 

 

[phetphet]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

Why? Can't he just pardon himself once in Office?

[riclag]

15 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

"Judge rules Trump’s conviction withstands Supreme Court immunity decision," (my bold)

by Zach Schonfeld and Ella Lee - 12/16/24 https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5043247-trump-hush-money-conviction-uphold/

"A New York judge upheld a jury’s verdict that convicted President-elect Trump of a felony, ruling the outcome of the hush money case can withstand the Supreme Court's new test for presidential immunity." (my italics)

 

 

First ,Merchan the dem NY judge doesn’t rule/ decide over the 

Scotus!

 

The Scotus always has the last say!

Still waiting for the adjudicated verdict 

process of criminality by the dem judge! Until then Trump isnt a dem convicted felon.

 

[Skeptic7]

29 minutes ago, phetphet said:

Why? Can't he just pardon himself once in Office?

Despite the uncertainty/lawfulness of a president being able to pardon themselves...it's an unknown. Never been done before and never even been considered before the lifelong criminal and president named Teflon Don Trump. Presidents do not have pardoning power for state crimes.

 

From Google AI...

"No, the president cannot grant pardons for state crimes: 

Federal vs. state crimes: The president's power to pardon only applies to federal crimes, not state or local offenses.

Governors and state pardon boards: Governors or a state pardon board handle pardons for state crimes."

[newbee2022]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

The only gangster gang was the Biden crime family, and they'll be gone soon once Joe has pardoned his crack addict gun toting prostitute using son Hunter (after promising not to).

 

Well, I talk about Trump and you about Biden. That can't work

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

First ,Merchan the dem NY judge doesn’t rule/ decide over the 

Scotus!

 

The Scotus always has the last say!

Still waiting for the adjudicated verdict 

process of criminality by the dem judge! Until then Trump isnt a dem convicted felon.

 

And do it starts, the denial that Trump has been convicted.

 

Why it even bothers him is a mystery, he demonstrably has no respect for the law and has stated he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not loose supporters.

 

[Yagoda]

It will all be gone as soon as the Apellate Division gets the case.

[johnnybangkok]

Don't you just love the mental gymnastics of the most fervant Trump fans who just can't admit their messiah can possibly have done ANYTHING wrong. Just ask yourself this; do you think he slept with Stormy Daniels (if you don't then I have a bridge to sell you), then ask yourself, when running for office and blackmailed into paying hush-money, he paid her $130,000 to avoid the obvious negative publicity of sleeping with a porn star. Then ask yourself is it reasonable that this payment was 'disguised' as reimbursements to his lawyer Cohen (who later pleaded guilty to eight federal charges of tax evasion, fraud and campaign finance violations related to the payments to Daniels and which saw him eventually jailed?) Finally, a federal judge and a grand jury then find him guilty of 34 felonies when presented with the mountain of evidence.   

 

What part of any of this doesn't sound like Trump yet here you all are talking about it being 'politically motivated' and a 'witch-hunt', just like you Beloved Leader tells you. 

 

It's ok to be a Trump fan but if that requires you to suspend all reasoning and objective analysis then I reckon that's just too high a price to pay.

 

[BigStar]

13 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

do you think he slept with Stormy Daniels

 

What anybody "thinks" is irrelevant, except Dems, being fascists, believe that their "think" should automatically convict w/o jury or trial. But they never think of any crimes Dems may have committed. Biden? Hunter? No-o-o!

 

17 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

then ask yourself, when running for office and blackmailed into paying hush-money, he paid her $130,000 to avoid the obvious negative publicity of sleeping with a porn star.

 

Wealthy men get extorted all the time by lying women. The latest confession of fraud comes from the Lacrosse players accuser. They win: the man usually settles for obvious reasons. Welcome to Me too. 

 

[BigStar]

9 hours ago, Social Media said:

Trump’s attorneys had argued that his status as a president-elect granted him immunity from prosecution.

 

Oh, well, worth a try. All part of lawfare: lawyers often make arguments they don't expect to succeed.

 

Ironically the judge disproved the leftist lies and hysteria that because of the SCOTUS decision, Trump can now do anything and is above the law. Can our libs stop lying about that now?

 

Merchan hasn't ruled on dismissal on other grounds, however, He may yet do so, to his credit. As partisan, however, he probably won't. Still, if he proceeds to judgement, he's made so many reversible errors that it'll be overturned on appeal.

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, BigStar said:

Oh, well, worth a try. All part of lawfare: lawyers often make arguments they don't expect to succeed.

 

Ironically the judge disproved the leftist lies and hysteria that because of the SCOTUS decision, Trump can now do anything and is above the law. Can our libs stop lying about that now?

 

Merchan hasn't ruled on dismissal on other grounds, however, He may yet do so, to his credit. As partisan, however, he probably won't. Still, if he proceeds to judgement, he's made so many reversible errors that it'll be overturned on appeal.

 

 

“Ironically the judge disproved the leftist lies and hysteria that because of the SCOTUS decision, Trump can now do anything and is above the law. Can our libs stop lying about that now?”

 

How so?

 

Trump is not yet President and Trump’s conviction does not relate to anything remotely under the heading ‘Presidential Duties’.

 

 

[johnnybangkok]

8 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

What anybody "thinks" is irrelevant, except Dems, being fascists, believe that their "think" should automatically convict w/o jury or trial. But they never think of any crimes Dems may have committed. Biden? Hunter? No-o-o!

 

 

Wealthy men get extorted all the time by lying women. The latest confession of fraud comes from the Lacrosse players accuser. They win: the man usually settles for obvious reasons. Welcome to Me too. 

 

You keep going on about Biden yet a GOP investigation found absolutely nothing to link Joe with receiving anything from the business dealings of his son - it's a broken record you all keep insisting on playing with absolutely no evidence other than hearsay and mud-slinging. Granted his son Hunter is less 'clean' but again he has been investigated and rightly convicted for his tax evasion and false statements made when trying to obtain a gun and yes, he has been controversially pardoned by his dad but who wouldn't do that for their family if given the opportunity to do so.
Comparing the Bidens to the Trumps is like comparing Ghandi to Al Capone.

[BigStar]

Just now, johnnybangkok said:

You keep going on about Biden yet a GOP investigation found absolutely nothing to link Joe with receiving anything from the business dealings of his son

 

DOJ and FBI stonewalled and agreed that Biden doesn't need to provide any proof that the 400,000, for example, was simple repayment of an undocumented "loan." And you believe THAT, of course. They won't investigate OR of course prosecute. Duh. Now Biden's made sure that the real evidence will remain buried. Hunter may have blackmailed him, of course.

 

 

[BigStar]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump is not yet President and Trump’s conviction does not relate to anything remotely under the heading ‘Presidential Duties’.

 

Disingenuous. We're talking about actions during or before his previous presidency for which T's lawyers tried to claim immunity because of the new SCOTUS ruling.

 

Leftists screamed that EVERYTHING would now be presidential duties, so now Trump was a legitimate dictator who could murder his political enemies and impose total censorship etc. etc. legally, w/o repercussion. Bimbos on the Court lent credence, but Roberts explained what the decision meant very clearly. And Merchan's decision falls into exactly what Robert had said, nothing about "unlimited power" and all that other nonsense. If Trump's convicted, then his lawyers probably won't try to push this line of argument further.

 

 

[johnnybangkok]

26 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

DOJ and FBI stonewalled and agreed that Biden doesn't need to provide any proof that the 400,000, for example, was simple repayment of an undocumented "loan." And you believe THAT, of course. They won't investigate OR of course prosecute. Duh. Now Biden's made sure that the real evidence will remain buried. Hunter may have blackmailed him, of course.

 

 

I think you are perhaps adding a few too many zero's there. 

 

'Comer cited three “direct monthly payments to Joe Biden from Hunter Biden’s business entity” as evidence that Joe Biden profited from a deal Hunter Biden made with a Chinese energy company. But Hunter Biden’s attorney said the payments — which totaled a little over $4,000 — simply reflect Hunter Biden repaying his father, who bought him a truck while Hunter was in the throes of drug and alcohol addiction. That explanation appears to be corroborated by emails obtained from Hunter Biden’s laptop, as reported by the New York Post last year.   https://www.factcheck.org/2023/12/gop-misleading-claims-in-biden-impeachment-investigation/

 

I will state this one last time - a GOP investigation (purposely set up to find evidence) has finally admitted there is ' still has no evidence, no crime' after literally years of trying to find some.  'Republican Rep. Don Bacon - “....at this point, there’s not a specific crime that has been committed.”   https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/don-bacon-admits-no-evidence-crimes-biden-impeachment-1234997042/

 

But you just keep drinking the Kool Aid without putting any objective reasoning to the echo chamber you so willingly inhabit.

[Chomper Higgot]

26 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

Disingenuous. We're talking about actions during or before his previous presidency for which T's lawyers tried to claim immunity because of the new SCOTUS ruling.

 

Leftists screamed that EVERYTHING would now be presidential duties, so now Trump was a legitimate dictator who could murder his political enemies and impose total censorship etc. etc. legally, w/o repercussion. Bimbos on the Court lent credence, but Roberts explained what the decision meant very clearly. And Merchan's decision falls into exactly what Robert had said, nothing about "unlimited power" and all that other nonsense. If Trump's convicted, then his lawyers probably won't try to push this line of argument further.

 

 

What is disingenuous about the observation that the crime for which Trump has been convicted was not part of any Presidential Duty?