Trump Declares 'Total and Definitive Victory' in Hush Money Case After Moves from Merchan and Bragg

Donald Trump’s sentencing in a New York state case involving his conviction for falsifying business records is now uncertain.

The former president had initially been set to face sentencing on Nov. 26 for 34 felony convictions. However, as Trump gears up for a potential return to the White House, his legal team is urging the dismissal of the case, according to a report by the New York Post.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has acknowledged his support for a delay but stated that his office is not prepared to dismiss the charges outright.

Bragg’s team emphasized that a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, which grants presidents broad immunity for their official actions, does not apply to this case.

“No current law establishes that a president’s temporary immunity from prosecution requires dismissal of a post-trial criminal proceeding that was initiated at a time when the defendant was not immune from criminal prosecution and that is based on unofficial conduct for which the defendant is also not immune,” Bragg wrote in court filings.

Bragg has requested an extension until Dec. 9 to determine the next steps for his office.

One possibility under consideration is to suspend the case until Trump’s potential term ends in January 2029.

Judge Juan Merchan has yet to provide a timeline for his decision on the matter.

Steven Cheung, Trump’s communications director, described the situation as a victory for the former president.

“This is a total and definitive victory for President Trump and the American People who elected him in a landslide,” Cheung declared in a statement on X.

“The Manhattan DA has conceded that this Witch Hunt cannot continue,” the statement continued.

“The lawless case is now stayed, and President Trump’s legal team is moving to get it dismissed once and for all,” Cheung added.

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley scoffed at Bragg’s concept of putting the case on ice.

The proposal would “allow a city prosecutor to put a leash on a sitting president for four years,” Turley wrote in an Op-Ed in the New York Post.

Turley called Trump’s election “arguably the largest jury decision in history.”

He said some evidence used against Trump likely would be stricken due to the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.

“The prosecutors not only elicited testimony from Trump aides in the White House but then doubled down on the significance of that evidence in their closing arguments. Merchan could declare that the court cannot rule out the impact of such testimony on the final verdict,” he wrote.