After former President Donald J. Trump was convicted of all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, he immediately denounced the convictions and attacked judges and the criminal justice system.
His loyalists in conservative media and Congress quickly followed suit, repeating his baseless assertions that he had fallen victim to a politically motivated sham trial. .
The show of solidarity reflects the extent of Mr. Trump’s grip on the base.
The former president and his supporters have criticized the judge who presided over the case, defaming the judicial system and distorting the details of the charges against him and his subsequent sentence.
Here’s a reality check of some of their claims.
What was said?
“We have a very conflicted, very conflicted judge. There has never been a more conflicted judge.”
– Mr. Trump during Friday’s press conference at Trump Tower in Manhattan
This is exaggerated. For more than a year, Mr. Trump and his allies have said that Judge Juan M. Merchan should not preside over the case because of his daughter’s career path. Loren Mercan, the daughter, served as president of a digital campaign strategy agency that has worked for many prominent Democrats, including Mr. Biden’s 2020 campaign.
Judicial ethics experts have said Ms. Merchan’s actions are not enough grounds to refuse. When Mr. Trump’s legal team asked him to recuse himself for the sake of his daughter, Judge Mercan sought advice from the New York State Advisory Commission on Judicial Ethics, said it did not see any conflict of interest.
The committee may not agree with Mr. Trump’s characterization of Judge Mercan as the most inconsistent judge ever, as the committee has recommended that judges discard or reuse themselves in many cases because of conflict of interest.
What was said?
“So you understand that it was all done by Biden and his people.”
– Mr. Trump at Friday’s press conference
This lacks evidence. To date, Mr. Trump has not yet provided evidence that President Biden is personally directing the money silence. The case was brought by Alvin L. Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney. Mr. Bragg is a local prosecutor, meaning neither Mr. Biden nor his administration has control over Mr. Bragg’s office or his cases. Furthermore, the investigation into hush money payments starting in 2018, before Mr. Biden took office and under Mr. Bragg’s predecessor.
What was said?
“We are not authorized to use our election experts under any circumstances.”
– Mr. Trump at Friday’s press conference
WRONG. Justice Mercan did not bar the election expert in question — Bradley A. Smith, former chairman of the Federal Election Commission — from testifying, but did limit what he could say. Ultimately, Mr. Trump’s lawyers did not call Mr. Smith.
In a pretrial motion, Judge Mercan ruled that Mr. Smith could testify generally about the Federal Election Commission and identify terms relevant to the case, such as “campaign contributions.” During the May proceedings, Justice Mercan note that allowing Mr. Smith to testify will invite testimony from an election expert chosen by prosecutors, leading to a “war of experts.”
Mr. Smith said on social networks that Mr. Trump’s lawyers decided not to call him but criticized Justice Mercan.
What was said?
“I should have spent 187 years in prison.”
— Mr. Trump during a press conference on Friday
This lacks evidence. It’s unclear how Mr. Trump arrived at his number. The exact penalty he faces, and whether it includes jail time, will be determined by Judge Mercan at sentencing on July 11.
Each of the 34 counts carries a maximum prison sentence of four years, equivalent to a total of 136 years. But Mr. Trump would likely have to serve the sentence concurrently for a maximum total of four years, if he ends up in prison. There is also a possibility that Justice Mercan could order probation without jail time.
Analyze similar cases – examined about 10,000 cases of falsifying business records, including 400 brought by the Manhattan district attorney, since 2015 – found that about 1 in 10 cases resulted in prison sentence. However, those cases often involve additional fees.
What was said?
“Everybody said it was a nonsense case, including Bragg — until I ran and then they saw the polls, I was leading the Republicans, I was leading the Democrats , I was leading everyone and suddenly they brought it back.”
– Mr. Trump at Friday’s press conference
WRONG. Mr. Trump has repeatedly pointed to errors in the timing of the incident as evidence of an election-related conspiracy.
The investigation into Mr. Trump’s finances, including hush money payments, began in 2018 under Mr. Bragg’s predecessor. It encountered many hurdles along the way and was described by one former prosecutor as a case of “zombies,” dying over and over again. That prosecutor resign from office in February 2022 after Mr. Bragg decided not to prosecute Mr. Trump, specifically for inflating the value of his assets.
But The New York Times reported that Mr. Bragg continued to pursue the hush money angle and was confident in the case into the summer of 2022. That spring, Mr. Bragg also openly emphasized that the investigation into the former president is ongoing. Mr. Trump announced his decision to run for re-election in November 2022. Mr. Bragg convened a grand jury January 2023 and Mr. Trump was indicted March 2023.
What was said?
“This is where Donald Trump got 5% of the vote. There is not a jury of his peers, but a jury of his opponents. Obviously this was staged. And they found a place where he couldn’t win. I mean, there was no chance of him getting an impartial jury and they refused to allow him a change of venue. There’s a reason the Florida trial didn’t happen, because they were afraid he would be acquitted.”
— Representative Nick Langworthy, Republican of New York, in an interview on Fox Business Network on Friday
WRONG. Mr. Trump and his allies have long complained about the large Democratic presence in Manhattan and asserted he could not get a fair trial there. (Mr. Trump received 12 percent of the vote in New York Countynot 5 percent, in the 2020 presidential election.)
It is true that Mr. Trump’s team tried but failed. transferred the case to federal court in Manhattan where prospective jurors will come from other New York counties, including those with more conservative voters.
But Mr. Trump’s defense also participated in jury selection, dismissing some prospective jurors. The 12 have been selected including some who didn’t have strong opinions about him, one who said she appreciated Mr. Trump’s candor and another who said the former president had done some good things for the country and got his news from Truth Social, Mr. Trump’s social media platform. (It is worth noting that some of Mr. Trump’s allies have forecast The jury was hung, pin their hope about one particular juror, who at times seemed to nod at the defense and make eye contact with Mr. Trump.)
In Florida, Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a Trump appointee, Still undecided when will the trial of his secret documents case begin. And actually it was Mr. Trump’s lawyers Look for these delays. On the other hand, prosecutors tried to speed up the matter.
What was said?
“You know, it’s not an issue for Judge Mercan to tell the jury that they don’t have to agree unanimously. I was like, really? Well, I beg to differ.”
— Sean Hannity, conservative news personality, on his radio show on Thursday
WRONG. Justice Mercan’s misinterpretation of jury instructions was echoed by Mr. Trump and some allies. In fact, Justice Mercan explain told jurors that falsifying business records – the charge Mr. Trump faces – is only a crime if committed to conceal or support another crime. The other charge, according to prosecutors, is a state election law known as Section 17-152, which prohibits aiding or hindering the election of a candidate “by unlawful means.”
Judge Mercan explained that juries “must unanimously find” that Mr. Trump violated that state’s election laws, but “do not need to be unanimous about what those illegal means were.”
What was said?
“The gag order, in all, is — in my view — an unconstitutional restriction on his right to free speech.”
— Mike Johnson, speaker of the House, in an interview Friday on Fox News
This needs context. Mr. Johnson made his point, but it is worth noting that an appeals court overruled his point. Merchant of justice imposed a gag order about Mr. Trump, and The appeals court upheld that order, rejected Mr. Trump’s argument that it violated his First Amendment rights.
According to the order, Mr. Trump cannot make statements about witnesses regarding their participation in the investigation and court proceedings; about prosecutors, court staff or their families if the opinion is intended to interfere with the case; or any statement about the jury.
In his ruling approving the gag order, Judge Mercan wrote that Mr. Trump’s statements “goes beyond defending oneself” against attacks and instead “threatens, incites, denigrates” and targets individuals and public figures.
The appeals courts found that Judge Mercan had reason to believe that Mr. Trump’s statements posed a threat.
What was said?
“We still don’t know what the crime is, because they put a new charge in the jury instructions that, oh, and by the way, in addition to meddling in the federal election he hasn’t If you are ever charged with a crime, you can also charge it as a crime.” felony — you could also make it a felony by tying it to some tax laws in New York, which they never mentioned during the entire trial.”
— Sen. Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, in an interview Thursday on Fox News
WRONG. Falsifying business records is usually a misdemeanor, but Prosecutors can bring felony charges if they believe that the accounting fraud was committed to conceal another crime, although they do not need to prove that such crimes were committed. While Mr. Trump’s allies and some legal scholars also question this legal basis, Mr. Rubio is simply wrong that prosecutors “never” mentioned it in its entirety. the court.
inside Indictment, published in April 2023, prosecutors repeatedly wrote that Mr. Trump falsified business records “with the intent to defraud and with intent to commit other crimes, and assisted and concealed the commission of show that behavior”. IN statement of factProsecutors allege other crimes include violating election laws and defrauding tax authorities. The prosecutor and Judge Merchan also mentioned other crimes throughout the court proceedings.
