Trump expressed appreciation for the language Merchan used in delaying his sentencing noting that it will only commence “if necessary.”

“I greatly appreciate the words in the letter today from the judge. He said ‘if necessary,’ being utilized in the decision, because there should be no ‘if necessary.’ This case should rightfully be terminated immediately,” Trump said during remarks to the Fraternal Order of Police in North Carolina. The former president also falsely stated that the sentencing was “postponed” because he “did nothing wrong.”

In addition to pushing back the sentencing until November 26, Merchan wrote that he would decide on Trump’s motion to vacate the verdict because of the Supreme Court’s immunity decision on November 12, which is also after the election. Merchan wrote in his letter that the Supreme Court “rendered a historic and intervening decision” with its immunity ruling.

Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung responded to the decision, saying, “There should be no sentencing in the Manhattan DA’s election interference witch hunt.”

“As mandated by the United States Supreme Court, this case, along with all the other Harris-Biden hoaxes, should be dismissed,” Cheung said.

A spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a statement: “A jury of 12 New Yorkers swiftly and unanimously convicted Donald Trump of 34 felony counts. The Manhattan D.A.’s Office stands ready for sentencing on the new date set by the court.”

The district attorney’s office did not oppose delaying Trump’s sentence, which Merchan cited in his decision Friday.

The decision to push back the sentencing until after the November 5 election marks yet another delay that’s been a fixture in all of Trump’s criminal cases since he was indicted four times – in New York, Florida, Washington, DC and Georgia – in 2023. The Florida classified documents case was dismissed by the judge in July – though the special counsel is appealing that decision – while the other two January 6-related cases are in limbo and won’t move forward before the election.

The only indictment that went to trial this year was the New York hush money case that ended in the May guilty verdict. Now the sentencing in that trial – with the question looming about whether a jail sentence will be imposed – won’t occur until after the election, if it happens at all.

Merchan acknowledged the historic nature of Trump’s hush money trial in his decision to push back the former president’s sentencing until after the election.

“This matter is one that stands alone, in a unique place in this Nation’s history, and this Court has presided over it since its inception – from arraignment to jury verdict and a plentitude of motions and other matters in-between. Were this Court to decide, after careful consideration of the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump, that this case should proceed, it will be faced with one of the most critical and difficult decisions a trial court judge faces - the sentencing of a defendant found guilty of crimes by a unanimous jury of his peers,” Merchan wrote.

“The members of this jury served diligently on this case, and their verdict must be respected and addressed in a manner that is not diluted by the enormity of the upcoming presidential election,” he continued. “Likewise, if one is necessary, the Defendant has the right to a sentencing hearing that respects and protects his constitutional rights.”

This is the second time that Merchan has pushed back sentencing in the case. Merchan delayed his initial July sentencing by two months after Trump’s lawyers asked Merchan to vacate the guilty verdict in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity.

Last week, Trump sought to move the state case into federal court, citing the Supreme Court’s decision this summer on presidential immunity, but a federal judge quickly denied the request days later without considering further arguments from Trump or the Manhattan District Attorney. Trump’s lawyers are appealing that ruling.

After filing that federal petition, Trump’s legal team also asked Merchan to let that litigation play out in federal court and refrain from issuing a decision over presidential immunity. Merchan noted the attempts to move the case to federal court in his letter Friday.

Trump’s lawyers have argued that the indictment should be dismissed or at least his conviction should be vacated because the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity means that certain evidence from the trial, such as the testimony of former White House aide Hope Hicks and tweets Trump sent while in office, should not have come before the jury.

Prosecutors have responded the conviction should stand and that the evidence presented at trial was “overwhelming.”

Accusations of Merchan being either a crypto-Trump supporter and/or a secret Russian plant will begin in 3, 2, 1...

>is in part to avoid any appearance of affecting the outcome of the presidential race
Ah yes, cause delaying it won't impact the race at all.

I hate dishonest bullshit like this.

>>1339577
>mad his party's attempts at weaponzing the justice system against political opponents didn't work and now Kamala still has to debate Trump on Monday

Womp womp

>>1339581
>“The members of this jury served diligently on this case, and their verdict must be respected and addressed in a manner that is not diluted by the enormity of the upcoming presidential election,” he continued.

>>1339582
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clkk4y93ypvo

>The US judge overseeing Donald Trump's hush-money case in New York City has written a letter to prosecutors and the former president's defence team about a Facebook post in which a person claims to have known the jury's decision before it became public.

>Justice Juan Merchan's letter says that on Friday "the court became aware of a comment" on the court's Facebook page, "now labeled as one week old" from a user named "Michael Anderson".

>"My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted," the post says, according to the judge. "Thank you folks for all your hard work!!!"

>>1339585
How gullible do you have to be to believe that?

>>1339590
The Judge clearly believes it since he put out a letter saying it was an issue that required investigation. Are you saying he's gullible too?

>>1339593
No he was following proper procedure. He doesn't have to believe it to be true to perform a function of his job.

>>1339597
>He doesn't have to believe it to be true
How do you know what he believes anon?

>>1339599
I'm saying what he believes is irrelevant to him ordering an investigation.

>>1339604
>I'm saying what he believes is irrelevant to him ordering an investigation.
You can just say you don't know what he believes.

>b-b-b-but it's irrelevant!
It's not. If he didn't feel it was a credible issue he wouldn't have ordered it investigated.

>>1339605
You hope it's a credible issue when it's simply facebook trolling and the judge is being thorough. Any idiot with a facebook account could claim to be someone's cousin.

>>1339560
>Judge delays Trump’s sentencing until after the election
This is a good thing, and a smart tactical move by the judge. After Harris is elected (and it is going to happen: >>1338859), Don Old Fart can't become a martyr and the legal system can really do a number on that orange felon.

>>1339560
When the time comes to put up or shut up, leftists always turn out to be cowards.

>>1339614
Your man made vagina is going to prolapse when Trump is elected

The Trumptards' collective brain cell will prolapse when Harris is elected and their orange boyfriend is in prison having his boipussy prolapsing by Tyrone & co.

>>1339560
is that Picture AI?
Trump looks like Kim Jong Un

>>1339617
>leftists are fantasizing about gay rape
>again

>rightists bringing up prolapsed orifices
>rightists having intrusive thoughts: their fantasies
Weird

>>1339615
Yes yes, we all know the right would happily burn America to the ground to own da libz.
Fortunately Trump wasn't able to pack every court with his lackies and there are still people in these positions who put country over party.

>>1339663
You've already burnt america to the ground.

>>1339664
You're free to leave any time you feel like.
I'll gladly help you pack.

>rightards' obsessions
>gay rape
>gay
>rape
Weird

>>1339664
>#1 global super power
>Leader in military superiority
>Leader in medical, weapons and computer technology
>Unemployment at all time lows
>Fastest economic growth in decades
>But /pol/lacks say its burned to the ground cause of trannies or something
Actual brain worms

>>1339670
The only thing burning to the ground is the rightards' 'America' as they lose the so-called 'Culture War': but that can only be a good thing. Starmergeddon on 4th July. Three days later National Faily thrown under the electoral bus by New Popular Front: and by the French electorate. And as proven here >>1338859 , the third domino will fall as those who aren't rightards want some of that rightism-destroying action. And on 5th November, as in another country that previously celebrated their independence from Conservatives on that 4th July: Bonfire Night.
Some people just want to watch the right wing world burn.

>>1339670
You will never own a house on this salary. Or a car. Or have a family. You will die alone, probably of starvation caused by the policies you literally spent your life supporting.

>>1339673
>Homeowner
>Two cars
>Planning to start a family next year
Did it ever occur to you that you might just be a fucking loser?

>>1339675
No one believes you, but even if that was true, shouldn't you want to uplift this poor working class fellow from the grip of poverty?

>>1339676
by voting republican? LOL

>>1339676
Sure, which is why I vote Democrat.
But no matter how I vote or how many safety nets society tries to build, you'll still be a fucking loser.

>>1339679
But I don't qualify for any of your safety nets.

>>1339679
You vote Democrat because you’re weak willed and can’t fend for yourself. You need to be told what to believe because deep down you know you’re a loser with no prospect of ever bettering yourself.

>>1339684
And yet I'm doing better than you by every measurable metric. I guess that just makes you a fucking loser.

>>1339692
For anyone curious as to why this democrat is so openly hostile to potential voters and the people he claims his policies are designed to help, it's because he knows voting no longer actually matters. The policies put into place by his party have made voters obsolete. Their election fraud industry all but guaranties his party's election in a large portion of the country, and they're fairly sure the electoral college.

>>1339696
You have been misinformed.

>>1339702
Inform me, because this is the message you're sending.

>>1339704
For one thing I'm not "this democrat", I'm a different poster. For another thing the people who invented the conspiracy theory you're repeating think you're a moron for still repeating it in 2024.

Best takeaway from the delay.
https://newrepublic.com/article/185707/trump-sentencing-delay-maga-rage-works

>>1339704
If you still believe in the widespread election fraud nonsense after the four years of utter face-planting that conservatives have done failing to provide any evidence whatsoever you're a comically unintelligent person and nothing that comes out of your mouth should be taken even remotely seriously.

>>1339560
100% he was pressured into doing this because that judge definitely does not have any sympathy for trump. The only way he could be pressured into doing so is if there was a good chance trump is gonna win as well. Concerning!

>>1339696
>The policies put into place by his party have made voters obsolete.
This is also a homogeneously idiotic thing to say. Both parties are scrambling for swing states right now, dumping hundreds of millions into ad buys and canvassing to combat the razor thin margins in these places. The notion that there's some mysterious policy put in place that makes voting obsolete while the entire political world right now is ferociously battling for every vote they can in these states too close to count betrays a mind that's been completely taken over by conspiracy dogshit. You don't live in the real world.

>>1339720
I like how you always preface it with "widespread." There was no need for widespread fraud to steal the election, as you well know. Just a few thousand votes in a handful of cities was all that was needed.

>>1339736
NTA, but the claim Trump and his pro coup group have been making for years is that there's widespread fraud and he actually won the popular vote.
Of course he's just a sore loser and even confessed he lost in 2020.

>>1339736
>I like how you always preface it with "widespread."
you're the one who shilled the concept of "widespread fraud" dishonest faggot

>>1339723
lmao

The kamalcoholic isn't even campaigning.

>>1339737
>>1339738
Note how they have to make shit up to make their narrative more believable.

>>1339740
note how you're a faggot shill

>>1339741
Cool it with the homophobia, chud.

>>1339748
shut up right wing faggot

>>1339720
>If you still believe in the widespread election fraud nonsense

The 2016 election was legitimate: yes or no

>>1339736
>I like how you always preface it with "widespread."
Yeah, because I'm not an idiot. "Widespread" doesn't just mean "a lot". Widespread indicates some broader trend that isn't explained simply by a handful of bad actors. The voter fraud the Trump and his sycophants claim exists is not just that there's handfuls of fake ballots being counted in a bunch of state by various, unrelated people. What they claim is a top down, organized conspiracy of hundreds of thousands of fake ballots executed by the Democrat party across multitudes of counties in several swing states. Someone familiar with the English language would describe this as "widespread".

>Just a few thousand votes in a handful of cities was all that was needed.
Just for you I'll change my verbiage - there is no evidence of outcome determinate fraud. In the event that any fraud was discovered there's precisely zero indication that any of it was enough to change the outcome of any election. You have no evidence of the existence of a few hundred, much less a few thousand fraudulent votes.

>>1339739
>No argument
You love to see it

>>1339813
Of course it was. There was no evidence of voter fraud in 2016 either.

>>1339815
>Just for you I'll change my verbiage - there is no evidence of outcome determinate fraud.
I'll amend his argument and say that literally only one vote is necessary to win a democratic election.

There also isn't such a thing as an insignificant amount of voter fraud, because every illegitimate vote risks disenfranchising every other legal voter. Which is why everybody who defends voter fraud, even in small amounts, is a fucking threat to the country.

They’re clearly willing to prop up outright lies and bullshit and force you against your will to go along with it too. Remember when they said that you didn't have a right to question the election for the sake of "protecting democracy"? When they said that that anybody who acknowledges Hunter's laptop was perpetuating foreign propaganda, despite already having authenticated the laptop? When the courts refused to consider the signed affidavits of election works as evidence, and then later concluded that no single citizen had the standing to challenge elections?

Anybody who continues to insist that the election wasn't stolen is an insurrectionist.

>>1339819
>I'll amend his argument and say that literally only one vote is necessary to win a democratic election.
That's a great story but, in reality, there's no evidence of outcome determinate voter fraud. Zero. There's zero evidence that the outcome of any presidential election has been changed by voter fraud. You're just giving me your feelings.

>There also isn't such a thing as an insignificant amount of voter fraud, because every illegitimate vote risks disenfranchising every other legal voter.
No. That makes no logical sense whatsoever. There never has been and will never be a system 100% completely impervious and infallible. Its a delusion. Right now we have an insignificant amount of voter fraud - an amount that has zero impact on the outcome election.

>Remember when they said that you didn't have a right to question the election for the sake of "protecting democracy"?
No. Nobody said that. Nobody ever said nobody has the right to question the election. The "I'm just asking questions" meme is the justification you people use to put fourth meritless claims of voter fraud and then when people call you out on repeating provable lies you throw your hands up and go "Oh woah, so I can't even question elections?". You're not asking questions, anon. You're making claims of voter fraud - claims that you have no evidence to support.

>When the courts refused to consider the signed affidavits of election works as evidence, and then later concluded that no single citizen had the standing to challenge elections?
No. This also didn't happen. Trump's lawsuits failed because they had no evidence, could establish no grounds of damages and were seeking retarded demands like throwing out hundreds of thousands of ballots. Everything you're upset about is right-wing propaganda.

>Anybody who continues to insist that the election wasn't stolen is an insurrectionist.
Your mind has been turned to mush by conservative extremism. You believe in a thing that isn't real.

>>1339821
The (lady) doth protest too much, methinks.

>>1339821
>That's a great story but, in reality, there's no evidence of outcome determinate voter fraud.
Individuals have been charged for committing voter fraud in the 2020 election.
>That makes no logical sense whatsoever.
Fraud vitiates every thing (United States v. Throckmorton).
>Nobody ever said nobody has the right to question the election.
Every single one of Trump's election-related lawyers was disbarred or put in jail by the government.
>No. This also didn't happen.
Pick a case at random. Look at the results. Let's take a look at Boland v. Raffensperger
"As an individual voter, Plaintiff lacks standing to raise generalized grievances against election officials’ conduct. Plaintiff is not a “Candidate” for the election he seeks to contest in this action and thus has no standing to bring this action. As a result, the Complaint is dismissed against Defendants and Intervenor-Defendants on this ground as well. "
>You believe in a thing that isn't real.
Go to the foot of the cross, demon.

>>1339824
>Individuals have been charged for committing voter fraud in the 2020 election.
There is no evidence of outcome determinate fraud. You can't provide any.

>Fraud vitiates every thing (United States v. Throckmorton).
It doesn't. Finding 1 case of fraud doesn't invalidate the entire electoral system.

>Every single one of Trump's election-related lawyers was disbarred or put in jail by the government.
For filing frivolous lawsuits, fraud and lying on court documents, not "questioning the election".

>Pick a case at random. Look at the results. Let's take a look at Boland v. Raffensperger
This case doesn't prove what you think it does. A private citizen can't file a lawsuit because they're upset about the results of an election. Being ass-mad is not grounds for damages. Besides that, the resolution he was seeking was a COMPLETE DECERTIFICATION of Georgia's ENTIRE election. It even says in the decision that even if the court found the case worthy on its merits, it has no jurisdiction over presidential electors. It couldn't even give this guy the result he was asking the court for. This whole suit is laughably retarded on its face.

>Go to the foot of the cross, demon.
See a psychiatrist. Your brain has been turned to mush by conservative propaganda.