- President-elect Donald Trump is set to appear for sentencing on January 10 after being convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. This marks the first time a U.S. president, former or sitting, has been convicted of felony crimes.
- The case stems from a $130,000 payment made by Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, to Daniels in 2016 to silence her claims of a past sexual encounter with Trump.
- Judge Juan Merchan rejected Trump’s motion to dismiss the case, emphasizing that presidential immunity does not shield him from prosecution.
- The case has sparked intense debate, with Trump and his legal team calling it politically motivated and criticizing Merchan for potential bias. Legal experts across the political spectrum have raised concerns about the case’s timing and motivations.
New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan has ordered President-elect Donald Trump to appear in Manhattan court sentencing on Jan. 10, just 10 days before his inauguration, in the criminal case involving alleged hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.
The sentencing, which will likely result in no jail time or fines, marks a historic moment as Trump becomes the first U.S. president – former or sitting – to be convicted of felony crimes. The case, which has been widely criticized as politically motivated, underscores the intersection of law, politics and the judiciary in a deeply polarized nation.
The case stems from an alleged $130,000 payment made by Trump's former attorney, Michael Cohen, to Daniels in 2016 to silence her claims of a past sexual encounter with Trump, which he denies.
A New York jury in May 2024 found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal the payment, which prosecutors argued was intended to influence the 2016 presidential election. Merchan's decision to proceed with sentencing, despite Trump's status as president-elect, has sparked intense debate over the role of the judiciary in political matters and the implications for the rule of law. (Related: Judge Merchan DELAYS Trump’s hush money sentencing until after election.)
In his ruling, Merchan rejected Trump's motion to dismiss the case, which argued that the conviction would impede his ability to govern and that presidential immunity should shield him from prosecution. The judge wrote that setting aside the jury's verdict would "undermine the Rule of Law in immeasurable ways" and that Trump's status as president-elect did not warrant the "drastic and rare" step of dismissing the case. Merchan also indicated that he would likely impose an "unconditional discharge," meaning no jail time, fines or probation, but the conviction would stand, allowing Trump to appeal.
The case has drawn criticism from legal experts across the political spectrum
CNN legal analyst Elie Honig described the case as "an ill-conceived, unjustified mess," while others have raised concerns about the timing and motivations behind the prosecution.
Critics have pointed to Merchan's daughter's financial ties to top Democrats as evidence of potential bias, though Merchan has dismissed such claims.
The sentencing date, set at the New York County Courthouse, places Trump in a unique position as he prepares to assume the presidency. While the unconditional discharge means he will not face immediate penalties, the conviction itself remains a significant stain on his legacy and raises questions about the precedent it sets for future presidents.
The case also highlights the broader legal challenges Trump faces. While the hush money case is the only one of his four criminal indictments to go to trial, the others – including federal cases related to the 2020 election and classified documents – have been dismissed or remain in limbo.
A separate state-level election interference case in Georgia is stalled after an appeals court removed prosecutor Fani Willis from the case. Trump's lawyers have argued that the dismissal of federal cases should influence the hush money case, but Merchan found that argument unpersuasive, noting the case's advanced stage.
Watch this clip from Fox News discussing Merchan's decision to reject Trump's bid to dismiss his conviction and sentencing.
This video is from the NewsClips channel on Brighteon.com.
More related stories:
House GOP says Manhattan DA, Judge Merchan violated Trump's constitutional and legal rights.
Anti-Trump impeachment counsel, congressman, sent money DIRECTLY to Judge Merchan's family.
Sources include:
Please contact us for more information.