Trump’s legal team slams Manhattan DA’s “absurd” proposal to treat his hush money conviction as if he were dead, calling it a blatant attempt to undermine his presidency.
At a Glance
- Trump’s lawyers urge dismissal of hush money conviction, rejecting DA’s “absurd” suggestions
- DA proposes options to uphold conviction, including treating case as if Trump had died
- Legal battle centers on presidential immunity and constitutional principles
- Trump’s team argues DA’s tactics interfere with presidential duties and violate the Constitution
- Judge Juan M. Merchan to decide on case dismissal, with far-reaching implications for presidential protections
Trump’s Legal Team Fights Back Against “Absurd” DA Tactics
President Donald Trump’s legal team has launched a fierce counterattack against the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, denouncing their proposed strategies to uphold Trump’s hush money conviction as “absurd” and unconstitutional.
Yes, they still want to throw him in prison.
The DA’s office suggested treating the case as if Trump had died, among other options, to maintain the conviction while navigating the complexities of presidential immunity.
Trump’s attorneys have filed a blistering 23-page response, urging Judge Juan M. Merchan to dismiss the conviction outright. They argue that the DA’s proposals are not only legally unsound but also represent a dangerous precedent that could severely undermine the office of the presidency.
BREAKING: President-elect Donald Trump’s lawyers formally ask a judge to throw out his hush money criminal conviction. https://t.co/L4UKGnX2AV
— The Associated Press (@AP) December 3, 2024
DA’s Controversial Proposals Spark Constitutional Debate
The Manhattan DA’s office has put forward several options to maintain Trump’s conviction, including freezing the case until he leaves office, agreeing to no jail time, or simply noting the conviction without sentencing. These suggestions have raised serious questions about the balance between prosecuting alleged crimes and respecting the constitutional protections afforded to a sitting president.
“Pretend as if one of the assassination attempts against President Trump had been successful,” Mr. Trump’s lawyers wrote in a blistering 23-page response
This scathing rebuke highlights the gravity of the situation and the perceived overreach by the DA’s office. Trump’s legal team argues that such tactics are not only disrespectful but also set a dangerous precedent for future presidents, potentially exposing them to undue legal harassment while in office.
Constitutional Crisis Looms as Judge Weighs Decision
Judge Juan M. Merchan now faces a critical decision that could have far-reaching implications for the balance of power between the judiciary and the executive branch. The options before him include dismissing the case entirely, as Trump’s lawyers demand, following the DA’s suggestions, or waiting for a federal appeals court to weigh in on the matter of presidential immunity.
“To be clear, President Trump will never deviate from the public interest in response to these thuggish tactics,” a Trump legal representative said, doubling down on their position that the case is politically motivated. The outcome of this legal battle could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future, potentially reshaping the landscape of presidential legal protections.
Will this madness ever end?
