NY judge rejects Trump’s bid to throw out hush-money case, sets March trial date

NY Post ^ | 02/15/2024 | Ben Kochman

[ChicagoConservative27]

A New York judge says former President Donald Trump’s hush-money trial will go ahead as scheduled with jury selection starting on March 25.

Judge Juan Manuel Merchan said Thursday that he made the decision after speaking with the judge in Trump’s now-delayed federal election interference case in the nation’s capital.

Donald Trump arrived at NYC court Thursday, where a judge will finalize a trial date in the criminal case charging the real estate mogul with concealing payoffs to alleged lovers to hide potential sex scandals from voters in the 2016 presidential election.

Trump, 77, took a seat at the defense table in a packed courtroom on the 15th floor of the criminal courthouse in lower Manhattan at 9:30 a.m. for a hearing expected to last two to three hours.

[CraigEsq]

The “crime” is that Trump allegedly misclassified the payments as business expenses instead of personal expenses. But in order for such misreporting to be a felony, it has to be done in concealment of some other crime (otherwise it’s a misdemeanor), which Bragg asserts is violation of (unidentified, last I knew) campaign finance laws. And a misdemeanor would have long since had its statute of limitations run (and even many of the allegedly false reporting still have had the SOL run even as felonies).

Of course had Trump classified them as personal payments, Bragg could have simply brought the exact same case alleging that they should have been classified as business payments.

[MrRelevant]

Exactly. The best part is none of them actually have merit. That of course does not guarantee he will found not guilty but they do set the table for years and years of appeals. Look at the dogshit theyre trying. Its reeeks of desperation. I mean wanst this case already tried and Daniels ordered to pay Trump?

[Sacajaweau]

Actually, I’d like to see the actual writings and the actual disbursement record. Was he really supposed to write payment to “......” to shut her up about a false accusation while this election is going on. It was not a personal expense...it was a legal matter, plain and simple.

[mbrfl]

>>” I mean wanst this case already tried and Daniels ordered to pay Trump?”

That’s what I thought too. This BS never ends. Funny how Obama and Biden have never been sued or indicted. They must be squeaky clean /s.

[MrRelevant]

I went and looked. That was for a defamation lawsuit against Trump that they threw out and she had to pay his legal fees.

[mbrfl]

Thanks for the info. Yes, it looks like the earlier case was a civil one. This one’s a criminal case. What crime he’s being accused of is beyond me. The left just invents it as they go.

[cowboyusa]

My Birthday.

[j.havenfarm]

I’m uncomfortable with the word “illegal” if you read into that that it’s crime. It a violation, and a serious violation, of judicial ethics codes

[Political Junkie Too]

I'm surprised that The Post is calling it a "hush money" case, and not a "non-disclosure agreement" agreement case.

For comparison, when John Edwards had his trial, a North Carolina jury acquitted him of "hush money." Watch a New York jury convict President Trump for the same thing.

-PJ

[Fledermaus]

Trump’s new AG in 2025 better go after every one of these corrupt judges and attorneys.

See how they like it. Deny them witnesses, testimony and a defense.

Make them squirm.

[Bob434]

Thanks- just wondering if there is a course of legal action that can be taken if they engage in it?

[j.havenfarm]

Complaint to whatever the disciplinary body for judges is in NY. But I find that media, left and right, is ignorant and sloppy in reporting legal matters. As I said in my original post, this is very significant but the reporter missed its significance entirely. It could well be that the judge disclosed that he was going to make the call beforehand but the reporter didn’t think it significant

[Bob434]

[[ But I find that media, left and right, is ignorant and sloppy in reporting legal matters]]

Oh very definately. Lazy too- a d worst of all dishonest when it comes to reporting on things that can hurt the liberal agenda- which often leads to wrong Impressions by the readers unfortunately. Even “conservative media” is lazy when trying to counter things like the accusation that man is causing climate change. There is a ton of info prov8ng we aren’t and it doesn’t take long to discover it, but when they argue with someone, they use arguments that just don’t hold up, which is a shame because the truth is readily available and it demolishes the lie,of man caused,climate change.

Well, thank you for,the info- I hope the judge rules fairly and without bias on the issue