ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith lashed out Monday at Judge Juan Merchan for his decision to schedule President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing days before his Jan. 20 inauguration.
Merchan on Friday ordered Trump to appear for his sentencing either in-person or virtually on Jan. 10, stating there is “no legal impediment” to issuing a sentence for the president-elect. Smith, on “The Stephen A. Smith Show,” argued that the sentencing, which is likely to include no penalties, is pointless except for tarnishing Trump’s reputation.
WATCH:
“This is the kind of stuff that just validates assertions about stuff being politicized. Maybe not specifically with Trump, but the suspicion definitely is there. What is the purpose of this? Is he going to jail? Are you going to jail? You going to give a fine? We got to sit up there and go through all the pomp and circumstance when you know you’re not going to do anything,” Smith said. “He was certified today as the next president of the United States of America. Come January 21st, he will be sworn in as the 47th president of the United States of America. But … you want to sentence him. You’re Juan Merchan — who is he, the state Supreme Court justice in New York? You want to sentence him next Friday? And by the way, what is the sentencing about?”
“Because see, we got to be real about it. We just got to be real about it. Thirty-four felony counts … sounds very, very damaging. It’s a hush money case. Essentially, the case against Donald Trump is that he is alleged to have engaged in relations with a former porn star and he made efforts involving finances to keep her mouth shut,” he continued. “That’s what all of this is about? You know what some people said to me when they were talking about this? They said, ‘Could you please tell me what’s the difference between this and somebody signing an NDA?’ I don’t know the answer to these questions. I’m just telling you what people’s thought process is.”
A Manhattan jury convicted Trump in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a nondisclosure agreement with porn star Stormy Daniels. Merchan’s jury instructions did not require the jurors to agree on the underlying crime that prosecutors alleged Trump falsified records to conceal.
Smith also criticized Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg for suggesting in his Dec. 9 opposition to Trump’s motion to dismiss the case that Merchan could adopt an abatement — a legal mechanism typically used “when a defendant dies between conviction and sentencing,” according to MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin.
“Why? That’s going to validate everything for you? Did you get him? Did you put him in jail? Did you prevent him from winning the election? No, you did not. So now all you’re doing is further impugning the name of the president-elect, soon to be the 47th president of the United States,” Smith said. “Doesn’t involve any jail time, doesn’t prevent him from being in office, doesn’t prevent him from signing anything into law. Damn sure didn’t prevent him from helping Mike Johnson win speaker of the House the other day when not one, but two, but three Republicans didn’t want to vote him in again as speaker.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
