Published on July 27, 2024, 12:58 am

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has publicly refuted former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn his May 30 conviction on 34 counts of falsified business records. This comes in the wake of a new ruling by the Supreme Court addressing presidential immunity.

In direct opposition to Trump’s post-trial motion, the District Attorney’s office filed a 69-page memo, which detailed their stance against Trump’s attempt to dismiss the case based on presidential immunity. They regarded it as entirely unrelated and thus incapable of reversing the unanimous decision made by the jury.

The heart of the matter rests upon the Supreme Court ruling that came into effect on July 1. It disallowed any evidence related to a president’s official acts from being used in court cases, even when dealing with unofficial actions. In this scenario involving Trump, he was charged with falsification of business records as part of his efforts to conceal payoffs as “hush money” to an adult film star prior to the 2016 elections.

In justification of their client, Trump’s legal team has pointed out that much of the evidence brought up during trial pertained to his term in office and should have been omitted. A significant portion of this allegedly out-of-context material includes testimonies from Hope Hicks, former White House communications director; Madeleine Westerhout, previously director of Oval Office Operations; Trump’s social media activity while in power; and information disclosed to the Office Of Government Ethics.

Contrarily, prosecution stated that minimal evidence involved Trump’s official actions and any that did were considered “harmless errors”. They maintained these could not derail a case supported by testimony from 22 witnesses and vast amounts of documents.

After being found guilty, Trump’s sentencing was initially slated for July 11 but later rescheduled by Judge Juan Merchan – setting September 6 for ruling on post-trial motion and September 18 for final verdict if necessary.

Soon after the groundbreaking Supreme Court ruling was announced, Trump’s team moved to dismiss his conviction arguing that significant chunks of prosecution evidence were covered under presidential immunity and should be removed according to the new verdict. This included a government ethics form, distinct social media posts published during his presidency, and testimony from White House aides.

The seemingly predominant narrative of the District Attorney’s 69-page memo argued that Trump’s legal representation failed to preserve all issues raised, that contested evidence doesn’t qualify as “official act evidence” and even if parts do, their presentation at trial was innocuous.

As part of the verdict review process, Judge Merchan will have to decide whether there has been any error in the case that might warrant a retrial. Presumably guided by Christian worldview and trusted news sources focusing on real news remain engaged in this dramatic unfolding story.