Visit our website:
http://www.france24.com
Like us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/FRANCE24.English
Follow us on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/France24_en
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00The US now and a New York court's decision on whether to uphold Donald Trump's criminal conviction
00:07in that hush money case has been delayed yet again with the judge postponing any decision
00:13or any sentencing until at least the 19th of November. The judge might decide to throw out
00:19the case on the grounds that it would be covered by the recent US Supreme Court ruling on presidential
00:25immunity. In May a jury found Trump guilty of falsifying business records making him the first
00:32former president ever convicted of a criminal offense. More on this from France 24's Jessica
00:38LeMessurier in New York. Judge Juan Machan has paused proceedings in Donald Trump's hush money
00:46case. He was supposed to decide today whether or not Trump's conviction could be thrown out due to
00:51the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity but now we're going to be waiting
00:57a bit longer. Proceedings are paused until November 19th. This comes after prosecutors
01:02with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office sent Machan an email back on Sunday
01:08asking him to pause proceedings due to Trump's election victory and his upcoming inauguration.
01:13Trump had asked the office to agree to this delay according to prosecutors. They wrote the people
01:20agree that these are unprecedented circumstances. Machan now has paused these proceedings so we're
01:26going to have to wait until next Tuesday to find out whether or not Trump is going to be off the
01:30hook. Back in May a jury found Trump guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in a
01:38scheme to influence the 2016 election. That made him the first former president ever convicted of
01:44a felony. Now we're going to be waiting another week to find out what will happen.
01:50Well for more on this story I'm joined now from Washington on the line by Eric Lizanne who
01:57is a former US federal prosecutor. Thank you very much for joining us Mr Lizanne. Welcome to the
02:05programme. I want to start by asking you about the options for decisions in this
02:13hush money case that's coming up. So will they uphold the conviction? What about sentencing?
02:20What are their choices? What are they going to do now that Donald Trump is president-elect
02:25and has been convicted of a criminal offence? Let's start with what they're supposed to have
02:32been doing which was getting ready for the sentencing which had already been put off
02:37in order to wait for the electoral campaign to finish. Now the only thing that has changed since
02:44even the US Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity is that we have had the election and
02:51Trump has won. The law has been exactly the same since then and on the issue of the law as to
02:58whether or not the case was properly brought according to the new dictates manufactured by
03:05the US Supreme Court regarding presidential immunity there was already a decision and a
03:11strong position taken by the prosecution which was upheld by the judge that such a small portion of
03:18the case really touched on anything remotely relating to official conduct that it wouldn't
03:23affect the verdict and that the verdict should stand. So to the extent that that is now being
03:29re-examined of course it is a surprise. Nothing has changed other than the fact that Trump has
03:35been elected and therein really lies the issue which is does the fact that now the defendant
03:43is the sitting president not just the former president change the calculus? It can't logically
03:50change it in terms of the weight of the evidence against him or the way in which the evidence was
03:56presented to a jury or whether improper evidence was submitted because that's already been briefed
04:03at least that and ruled on at least by this level but it appears that the prosecution really is
04:09motivated by the fact that wow now the defendant is the sitting president of the United States
04:16do we really want to go forward and it may be a case where as we approach the sentencing here
04:23we might be advocating for jail and how can we possibly do that? So the prosecution seems to be
04:29getting cold feet and of course if they indicate that to the judge the judge is going to take a
04:34step back as well and that's where all the parties are now. So to get back to your original question
04:41what are the options they could throw out the case that would seem to make no sense but they could do
04:46that they could also say in light of the fact that defendant is now the sitting president we have to
04:52put the case in suspense or they could say in light of that fact we simply have to pretend like
04:58the case never happened and throw it out on that basis not on the basis of the sufficiency of the
05:03evidence those are the options now available before the court. Do you have any inkling of which way it
05:11might go? I mean you're saying that just because of the sheer messiness of this it might be the
05:16case that not that the conviction is not upheld because as you say it's hard not to uphold it
05:22nothing new has has come out but that the sentence might perhaps be suspended and then would would
05:29he serve his sentence after his term? That is one possibility and I think that's one of the things
05:37that the prosecution has and and the other side Trump's side has to brief and the judge has to
05:42rule on what would be the mechanics for imposing and and more importantly serving a sentence the
05:49judge did indicate even during the trial when Trump was violating contempt orders that he didn't want
05:56to impose what would be a normal sentence of contempt into those circumstances which would
06:01have been immediately remanding or locking up Trump because of the fact of the campaign and
06:06that Trump theoretically at least could be the next president now it's actually happened so we
06:12know that there's definitely worries there and cause for concern they they don't really want
06:18to be trailblazers and now they're in that position so that is one of the options that
06:23they could hold the whole sentencing in suspense or they could just say look we don't even want
06:29to do that we're just going to throw out the entire case I think the judge is really going
06:34to take his cues from what the prosecution submits now in the course of the coming week
06:41a lot of U.S. citizens think that the justice system in the U.S. is biased in this case
06:47biased against Donald Trump the those on the right think so but there are numerous
06:52instance why is there so little trust in the system in the U.S. is it to do with the fact
06:58that some of these are in fact political appointees I mean how does it work
07:03well I don't know if there's really that an organic bias as you say certainly there's a
07:09sense of outrage by Trump's camp that has been ginned up or stoked or amplified which comes from
07:17from the right but the evidence was overwhelming and I think most people see the strength of the
07:23evidence is indisputable and it was tried to a jury of Trump's peers now part of the argument
07:31that the right that Trump's base has put forward in objecting to this is that it took place in
07:37Manhattan and that supposedly everybody in Manhattan hates Donald Trump and therefore
07:43he couldn't get a fair trial there but that's where the crimes occurred and Trump was tried
07:48the same way as anybody else and everybody there the judge and the parties were scrupulously
07:53fought in the prosecution rather were scrupulously following the rules of evidence but we are in a
07:59very heavily politicized environment which has been stoked that way by the Trump campaign they
08:06saw it to their advantage to do that we're coming off months and months of repeating these claims
08:11and the defense against all of these criminal cases that have been brought against Donald Trump
08:16is exactly that that they're political and now the fact that they're going away because he's
08:22been elected effectively is going to give him further fodder to claim that but we have to look
08:28at the right but we have to look at the evidence it's been very very strong okay well we'll have
08:33to leave it that's fascinating eric glissand thank you so much for your time eric glissand
08:38former thank you so much we're going to move on now to germany