New York. The judge in the case against Donald Trump for buying the silence of former porn actress Stormy Daniels decided to indefinitely postpone the announcement of her sentence, which constitutes a legal victory for the president-elect who will return to the White House in January.
In his decision, Colombian-born judge Juan Merchan postponed the sentencing, scheduled for November 26, while he weighs the magnate’s defense request to dismiss the case completely based on the fact that he is now president-elect.
Trump was found guilty last May of 34 counts of “aggravated accounting falsification” in the payment of $130,000 to former porn actress Stormy Daniels to keep silent about an alleged extramarital affair in 2006, which the mogul has always denied. .
Prosecutors argued that this payment was intended to cover up a possible scandal that would tarnish his campaign for the presidency in 2016, which he won against Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Trump’s defense has tried by all means to avoid any sentence against the Republican magnate before returning to the White House on January 20.
His victory in the November 5 elections has brought justice to an unprecedented situation.
“It is ordered to consider the joint request for suspension of the sentence to the extent that the date of November 26, 2024 is postponed,” Merchan ruled in an order.
Before the election, Trump’s lawyers had asked for the case to be dismissed in light of a Supreme Court ruling, which ruled that presidents have immunity during the exercise of the presidency in their official acts.
But Manhattan prosecutors argued that when the acts in the Stormy Daniels case were committed, Trump was not president.
The judge also authorized Trump’s lawyers to present before December 2 an appeal for the definitive dismissal of the case.
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘
fbq(‘init’, ‘133913093805922’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Contact’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Donate’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘FindLocation’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Lead’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Search’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Subscribe’, {value: ‘0.00’, currency: ‘MXN’, predicted_ltv: ‘0.00’});
fbq(‘track’, ‘ViewContent’);
#Judge #indefinitely #postpones #Trumps #sentence #Stormy #Daniels #case
–
**Given the indefinite postponement of sentencing and Trump’s potential return to the White House, how might the legal strategy of the prosecution be affected, and what are the challenges they might face in pursuing this case against a sitting president?**
## Interview: The Uncertain Future of the Stormy Daniels Case
**Introduction:**
Welcome to World Today News. Today we are discussing the latest developments in the Stormy Daniels case against former President Donald Trump. Judge Juan Merchan has indefinitely postponed Trump’s sentencing, creating a complicated legal landscape as the former president prepares to return to the White House. Joining us today are two esteemed legal experts: [Guest 1 Name and Credentials] and [Guest 2 Name and Credentials].
**Section 1: The Postponement and its Implications**
* **Host:** Judge Merchan’s decision to postpone the sentencing has been interpreted by some as a victory for Donald Trump. [Guest 1], do you agree with this assessment, and what are the implications of this delay for the case?
* **Guest 1:**
* **Host:** [Guest 2], how do you see the postponement impacting public perception of the case? Do you think it strengthens or weakens the case against Trump?
* **Guest 2:**
**Section 2: Legal Arguments and Presidential Immunity**
* **Host:** The article mentions Trump’s defense team using a Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity as a basis for dismissal. Can you explain this argument in more detail, and what are its potential weaknesses, [Guest 1]?
* **Guest 1:**
* **Host:** [Guest 2], the prosecution argues that this immunity claim does not apply because the alleged actions took place before Trump became president. How strong is this counter-argument from a legal standpoint?
* **Guest 2:**
**Section 3: The Impact on the Future Presidency**
* **Host:** With Trump’s return to the White House, what are the potential obstacles and complications for prosecutors in pursuing this case? [Guest 2], what are the precedents for cases involving sitting presidents?
* **Guest 2:**
* **Host:** [Guest 1], how might this case influence future legal strategies for dealing with potential wrongdoings by presidents? Could it set a precedent for shielding presidents from accountability?
* **Guest 1:**
**Section 4: Looking Ahead**
* **Host:** Judge Merchan has given Trump’s lawyers until December 2nd to file an appeal for the case’s dismissal. What are your predictions for the future of this case, and what are the potential outcomes?
* **Guest 1:**
* **Guest 2:**
**Conclusion:**
* **Host:** Thank you both for offering your insights on this complex and highly significant case. It remains to be seen how this will play out, but the implications for legal precedent and the future of American politics are undeniable.
**Remember to adapt the questions and discussion points based on the specific expertise and perspectives of your guests.**
