Trump was convicted of 34 felonies a year ago. He's still battling the case
One year ago today, a jury of 12 New Yorkers convicted Donald Trump for falsifying business records as part of an alleged hush money scheme to influence the 2016 election.
The conviction left an indelible mark on Trump -- making him the first president or former president to be found guilty of a crime -- and his fight to erase that legacy continues to this day.
On June 11, a federal appeals court in Manhattan is set to hear oral arguments in the president's renewed legal fight to move his criminal case from state to federal court.
MORE: Timeline: Manhattan DA's Stormy Daniels hush money case against Donald Trump
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg opposes the move -- arguing that a case can't be removed to federal court after conviction -- but Trump's lawyers have argued the "unprecedented criminal prosecution of a former and current president of the United States belongs in federal court."
Trump was found guilty on 34 felony counts after prosecutors alleged that he engaged in a "scheme" to boost his chances during the 2016 presidential election through a series of hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels and the falsification of New York business records to cover up that alleged criminal conduct.
"I did my job, and we did our job," Bragg said following Trump's conviction. "There are many voices out there, but the only voice that matters is the voice of the jury, and the jury has spoken."
Ten days before Trump was sworn in as president last November, New York Judge Juan Merchan sentenced him to an unconditional discharge -- without prison, fines or probation -- saying it was the "only lawful sentence" to prevent "encroaching upon the highest office in the land."
"I won the election in a massive landslide, and the people of this country understand what's gone on. This has been a weaponization of government," Trump told the court during his sentencing.
Trump continues to vehemently deny any wrongdoing, and his lawyers have argued that his conviction relied on evidence and testimony that related to his official acts as president, including social media posts from his official Twitter account as president and testimony from his former communications director Hope Hicks.
The trial took place one month before the Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling expanding the scope of presidential immunity, and Trump's lawyers have argued that the evidence would have not been permitted based on the high court's ruling.
Trump's lawyers attempted to use that argument to throw out the case before Trump's January sentencing, but the argument was rejected by Judge Juan Merchan, two New York appeals courts, and the Supreme Court.
"The alleged evidentiary violations at President-Elect Trump's state-court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal," the Supreme Court said in a brief unsigned opinion, though four justices said they would have granted Trump's application.
For Trump's criminal defense, he relied on then-defense attorneys Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, who now serve as the deputy attorney general and principal associate deputy attorney general. Earlier this week, Trump announced that he plans to nominate Bove -- who led a purge of career law enforcement officials before the Senate confirmed his nomination to help run the DOJ -- to the United States Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.
MORE: Trump sentencing transcript: Listen to Trump's entire hush money sentencing hearing
With his former defense attorneys now working for the government, Trump earlier this year tapped the elite Manhattan law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell to handle his criminal appeal.
Lawyers with the Department of Justice also filed an amicus brief in the case this week to argue that the case should be heard -- and thrown out -- by a federal court because the jury's conviction relied on evidence that was covered by presidential immunity.
"That President Trump's defense in fact takes the form of a new constitutional immunity announced by the Supreme Court after his trial ended, rather than a new statute enacted by Congress, should if anything cut in the President's favor," lawyers with the Department of Justice argued in a brief submitted on Tuesday.
The appeal -- as well as the ongoing appeal of Trump's $83 million judgment in the E. Jean Carroll civil case and half-billion-dollar civil fraud case -- is proceeding on uncharted legal grounds as Trump wields the power of the presidency in his defense. He has characterized the prosecutors who pursued the cases against him as politically motivated, and has touted his electoral victory last November as a political acquittal.
"The real verdict is going to be Nov. 5 by the people," Trump told reporters as he left court following his conviction last year. "And they know what happened here, and everybody knows what happened here."
Trump was convicted of 34 felonies a year ago. He's still battling the case originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
9 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
NATO leaders are set to agree a historic defense spending pledge, but the hike won't apply to all
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — NATO leaders are expected to agree this week that member countries should spend 5% of their gross domestic product on defense, except the new and much vaunted investment pledge will not apply to all of them. Spain has reached a deal with NATO to be excluded from the 5% of GDP spending target, while President Donald Trump said the figure shouldn't apply to the United States, only its allies. In announcing Spain's decision Sunday, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said the spending pledge language in NATO's final summit communique — a one-page text of perhaps half a dozen paragraphs — would no longer refer to 'all allies.' It raises questions about what demands could be insisted on from other members of the alliance like Belgium, Canada, France and Italy that also would struggle to hike security spending by billions of dollars. On Friday, Trump insisted the U.S. has carried its allies for years and now they must step up. 'I don't think we should, but I think they should,' he said. 'NATO is going to have to deal with Spain.' Trump also branded Canada 'a low payer.' NATO's new spending goals The 5% goal is made up of two parts. The allies would agree to hike pure defense spending to 3.5% of GDP, up from the current target of at least 2%, which 22 of the 32 countries have achieved. Money spent to arm Ukraine also would count. A further 1.5% would include upgrading roads, bridges, ports and airfields so armies can better deploy, establishing measures to counter cyber and hybrid attacks and preparing societies for future conflict. The second spending basket is easy for most nations, including Spain. Much can be included. But the 3.5% on core spending is a massive challenge. Last year, Spain spent 1.28% of GDP on its military budget, according to NATO estimates, making it the alliance's lowest spender. Sánchez said Spain would be able to respect its commitments to NATO by spending 2.1% of GDP on defense needs. Spain also is among Europe's smallest suppliers of arms and ammunition to Ukraine, according to the Kiel Institute, which tracks such support. It's estimated to have sent about 800,000 euros ($920,000) worth of military aid since Russia invaded in 2022. Beyond Spain's economic challenges, Sánchez has other problems. He relies on small parties to govern and corruption scandals have ensnared his inner circle and family members. He is under growing pressure to call an early election. Why the spending increase is needed There are solid reasons for ramping up spending. The Europeans believe Russia's war on Ukraine poses an existential threat to them. Moscow has been blamed for a major rise in sabotage, cyberattacks and GPS jamming incidents. European leaders are girding their citizens for the possibility of more. The alliance's plans for defending Europe and North America against a Russian attack require investments of at least 3%, NATO experts have said. All 32 allies have endorsed these. Each country has been assigned 'capability targets' to play its part. Spanish Foreign Minister José Albares said Monday that 'the debate must be not a raw percentage but around capabilities.' He said Spain 'can reach the capabilities that have been fixed by the organization with 2.1%.' Countries much closer to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine all have agreed to reach the target, as well as nearby Germany, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands, which is hosting the two-day summit starting Tuesday. The Netherlands estimates NATO's defense plans would force it to dedicate at least 3.5% to core defense spending. That means finding an additional 16 billion to 19 billion euros ($18 billion to $22 billion). Setting a deadline It's not enough to agree to spend more money. Many allies haven't yet hit an earlier 2% target that they agreed in 2014 after Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula. So an incentive is required. The date of 2032 has been floated as a deadline. That is far shorter than previous NATO targets, but military planners estimate Russian forces could be capable of launching an attack on an ally within five to 10 years. The U.S. insists it cannot be an open-ended pledge and a decade is too long. Still, Italy says it wants 10 years to hit the 5% target. The possibility of stretching that period to 2035 also has been on the table for debate among NATO envoys. An official review of progress could also be conducted in 2029, NATO diplomats have said. ___ Suman Naishadham in Madrid contributed to this report.
Washington Post
11 minutes ago
- Washington Post
NATO leaders are set to agree a historic defense spending pledge, but the hike won't apply to all
THE HAGUE, Netherlands — NATO leaders are expected to agree this week that member countries should spend 5% of their gross domestic product on defense, except the new and much vaunted investment pledge will not apply to all of them. Spain has reached a deal with NATO to be excluded from the 5% of GDP spending target , while President Donald Trump said the figure shouldn't apply to the United States, only its allies.
Bloomberg
14 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
What's Next After the Initial Fallout from US Strikes on Iran
What's next? The unprecedented US airstrikes on Iran have set traders and governments worldwide on edge, as the Islamic Republic warns of retaliation and Israel shows no sign of letting up in its assault. Asian currencies and stocks fell, European stock futures declined while oil advanced, then erased gains, after Washington struck Iran's nuclear sites over the weekend. China and Pakistan were quick to condemn — even though China hasn't yet offered substantial assistance to Tehran besides rhetorical support and Pakistan is at the same time taking steps to build stronger ties with the White House. The US State Department issued a ' Worldwide Caution ' alert for Americans. More critically, President Donald Trump's decision to deploy bunker-busting bombs — in Washington's first direct military action against Iran after decades of hostility — has pushed the Middle East into uncharted territory. Did the end justify the means? While the US attacks have set back Iran's nuclear ambitions and dealt its clerical regime a humiliating blow, the program hasn't been completely destroyed. The move may ultimately lead Tehran to end international monitoring of its nuclear program and consider going ahead to develop a bomb. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hasn't been seen in public in 11 days but remains in control. Even as diplomatic allies Russia and China have stayed on the sidelines and its network of armed proxies in the region remains weakened, Tehran still has ways to inflict pain on the US as it plans its retaliation. Two supertankers, each capable of hauling about 2 million barrels of crude, U-turned in the Strait of Hormuz after the US airstrikes on Iran raised the risk of a response that would ensnare commercial shipping in the region, according to vessel tracking data compiled by Bloomberg. The two empty freighters then sailed south, away from the mouth of the Persian Gulf. The turning oil carriers offer the first signs of re-routing, something that oil traders will scrutinize. Any disruption to traffic through the strait, a major artery for global crude and natural gas, raises the specter of a spike in energy prices. That's bad news for Asia, which buys more than four-fifths of all the crude produced in the Middle East, 90% of which goes through the Strait of Hormuz.
