Regular readers who have been paying attention to the calendar know that Judge Merchan is overdue for his ruling on a motion for a new trial in Trump’s ‘hush money’ case in Manhattan. You know, the one that gives the left the talking point that Trump has ‘34 convictions.’ Today we get the news that Judge Merchan might be moving even further away from the leftist onanistic dream of putting the once and future president in a chain gang:
🚨 President Trump’s sentencing in the New York case has been delayed indefinitely by Merchan and a motion to dismiss the case entirely has been allowed to go forward. pic.twitter.com/zSYAjuvMnM
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) November 22, 2024
So, what is going on here? Well, first, the order grants leave to file a motion to dismiss under Criminal Procedure Law § 210.40. To translate that from legalese to English, the judge is not dismissing the case. Instead, he is giving Trump’s lawyers permission to ask (or move) to dismiss the case. Then the judge sets up scheduling for this—this will happen early in December. Then the judge indefinitely stayed (or postponed) both sentencing and a motion for basically a new trial.
And the citation to § 210.40 is interesting. Let’s quote from part of that rule:
§ 210.40 Motion to dismiss indictment; in furtherance of justice.
1. An indictment or any count thereof may be dismissed in furtherance of justice, as provided in paragraph (i) of subdivision one of section 210.20, when, even though there may be no basis for dismissal as a matter of law upon any ground specified in paragraphs (a) through (h) of said subdivision one of section 210.20, such dismissal is required as a matter of judicial discretion by the existence of some compelling factor, consideration or circumstance clearly demonstrating that conviction or prosecution of the defendant upon such indictment or count would constitute or result in injustice. …
Recommended
So, the gist is that the court can dismiss the case not because of any legal grounds, but because the judge just wants to really, really badly. And what ground is the judge considering? Well, our sister site Red State published a letter seeking that leave …
Trump's Legal Team Requests Dismissal of Manhattan Case on New Groundshttps://t.co/MBAaAh2NZN
— RedState (@RedState) November 21, 2024
… and the short version is that they are saying it should be dismissed because of the unique constitutional problems involved with a state court asserting jurisdiction over the president-elect.
So, is this likely to be granted? We lean toward ‘yes,’ but not with a massive amount of confidence.
First, in the most technical sense, the judge is only saying to Trump’s team ‘you can ask for dismissal, but I might not grant it.’ And a neutral judge would mean nothing more than that.
But we don’t think Merchan is neutral. The man had the gonads to sit in a case after he donated both to Biden and an anti-Trump PAC in violation of state law. Any judge with a sense of shame would have immediately stepped out of the case, but Merchan wanted the case that badly. And that is only one of a number of reversible errors Merchan made in that case. Trump really didn’t get a fair trial.
And we didn’t say this publicly, but in the run up to the election, we had a theory why Merchan had delayed sentencing until after the election. We think Merchan believed that Trump would lose and he was afraid that Trump would try to overthrow the election or something like that. Bear in mind, to the left, January 6, 2021, was an actual coup attempt as surely as if Trump led a line of tanks to Congress. Of course that is nonsense, but that is how the left sees it and Merchan was probably worried that Trump would try it again. Thus, we think that Merchan was thinking something like this: ‘When Trump loses, he might try to overthrow the government again. So this will give me the chance to stop him before he tries another coup. I will save democracy. Huzzah!’
But the fact Trump won and it was known that he won early the next morning was a complete shock to Merchan and now the idea of finding a way out of this case is probably looking very tempting to him. Furthermore, it allows Merchan to say, in essence, ‘you are guilty, I ran a perfectly fair case, but I’m letting you go, anyway’ allowing the left to still pretend his trial was fair—so he not only gets an ‘out’ but he can save face in the process by pretending it is only because Trump is about to take office. And while we said that all the order was literally saying was ‘you can ask for dismissal, but I might not grant it’ we don’t think Merchan is neutral enough to be saying that. Rather, we think he is at least leaning in the direction of granting it.
But that last bit is more psychology than law, so we won’t exactly bet the house on it. But that is what our gut tells. Your mileage might vary.
On to reactions:
BYE BYE pic.twitter.com/XJa8MtWIB1
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) November 22, 2024
YUGE win in Manhattan DA case Sentencing cancelled, the judge also apparently asked to file papers to dismiss case.
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) November 22, 2024
Another one bites the dust!!! LFG🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/soLqPAs3Qh
Sorry, Donald Trump, Jr., that isn’t quite accurate. You make it sound like the court ordered Bragg to file a motion to dismiss. But in truth, Merchan only gave Trump’s lawyers permission to ask for the case to be dismissed, and gave Bragg’s team an opportunity to oppose it. That’s not asking Bragg to file ‘papers to dismiss.’
But to be fair to Don Jr., we don’t think he’s a lawyer, so his confusion is understandable.
BREAKING.🚨
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) November 22, 2024
New York judge Juan Merchan has allowed former President Donald Trump to seek the dismissal of his 'hush money' criminal case following his victory in the presidential election.
Trump had been scheduled for sentencing on November 26, but Manhattan prosecutors… pic.twitter.com/gqHM37HNDz
The cut off text reads:
Trump had been scheduled for sentencing on November 26, but Manhattan prosecutors requested deferring proceedings until after his upcoming presidential term ends in January 2029.
Trump's legal team argues that continuing the case during his presidency would create ‘unconstitutional impediments’ to governance. The Manhattan District Attorney's office opposes dismissal but has agreed to allow Trump to present his arguments through written motions.
The judge has set a December 2 deadline for Trump to file his motion and a December 9 deadline for the prosecution's response.
This is the heart of the matter in the "hush money" case.
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) November 22, 2024
Waiting almost five years to sentence someone over a case that never should have been brought is *INSANE.* https://t.co/rD5cbYx8BL
Even one of our fellow writers got into this:
I thought the wording Fox used sounded weird. "The judge gave them permission to file a motion to dismiss" is not any language I've ever heard used. Merchan belives the rhetoric and wants an off ramp LOL
— Rick Robinson #MAGA/MAHA2024 (@RowdyRick73) November 22, 2024
It is weird, but the law is weird sometimes. Sometimes you have to file for leave to file a motion. This is sometimes written into the rules, and sometimes a judge issues an order requiring such leave.
Another L for Democrats. pic.twitter.com/uAuNeepo8E
— ZNO 🇺🇸 (@therealZNO) November 22, 2024
This is a superior photoshop.
All these cases against Trump are baseless. The hammer of Justice is coming. That judge should be in jail.
— Valentina Gomez (@ValentinaForUSA) November 22, 2024
However badly Judge Merchan or Alvin Bragg violated Trump’s rights, they have immunity—which just goes to show that granting Trump presidential immunity is not really as unprecedented as the left pretends. Judges have immunity. Prosecutors do. Congress does. And even before the ruling this year, Presidents enjoyed immunity in civil suits. So, extending immunity to Presidents in criminal cases really wasn’t a very big step.
When does President Trump get his apology?
— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) November 22, 2024
Pretty sure it’ll be when hell freezes over. This is like trying to get Al Gore to admit that predictions of climate catastrophes were wrong.
Everybody knew this case was BS except the most deranged leftoid. Merchan just affirmed that.
— J (@ARaised_Eyebrow) November 22, 2024
I’m not counting my chickens until they hatch. I don’t trust Merchan, Bragg or anyone affiliated with the lawfare cases against Trump. I’m waiting until it’s truly dismissed.
— Birdie Sloan (@sdixiecotton) November 22, 2024
A reasonable approach.
The American people rendered our verdict:
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) November 22, 2024
President Trump is going to the White House, not Riker’s Island.
Those who waged unprecedented, republic-ending lawfare against him must face legal, financial, and political accountability.
Nobody is above the law.
Justice is coming. https://t.co/bhJe1YwEaw
either way this should be brought to the supreme court https://t.co/ODnvx5OYav
— William Mollica (@billmollica) November 22, 2024
If the Democrats had put half as much effort into listening to voters as they did their disastrous lawfare - and never had done the lawfare - they probably would have won the election. https://t.co/S9crTHrK5u
— IT Guy (@ITGuy1959) November 22, 2024
That being said, we are very glad to see Trump win the election if only to prove this kind of lawfare wasn’t going to sway the public. Indeed, we think it had a Streisand-like effect, increasing his support. That will reduce the incentive to try this again. And naturally, if Trump wins all of these cases, more’s the better.
Merchan wound up holding a Tiger by the tail...he wants OUT.
— FuryanEnergy (@ranbarn54) November 22, 2024
Good metaphor.
RELATED: WATCH: Kamala Supporter Nick Fuentes Pepper Sprays a Person Who Tried to Ring His Doorbell
Eleventh Circuit Judge Absolutely Embarrasses CNN on Misinformation and We Are Here for It
WATCH: Jews Under Attack in Amsterdam While the Legacy Media is Silent
WATCH: CBS News’ 60 Minutes DECEPTIVELY EDITS Kamala's Word Salad Response on Israel
Join the conversation as a VIP Member