Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office, using former President Trump’s legal team’s own words, uses the words of former President Trump’s legal team to issue a statement amid new allegations that Judge Marchand’s daughter is reaping financial benefits as a result of the hush-money scandal. , opposed pressure from the defense team to get Judge Juan Machan to withdraw from the hush money case. Democratic Party political consultant.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche and Susan Necheres, said in a pretrial motion Monday that Mr. Marchan’s daughter, Lauren Marchan, who works as a director and partner at Authentic Campaigns, is involved in the lawsuit against Mr. Trump. He claimed he was benefiting financially from the upcoming trial. Her father is supervising.
Despite the new information coming to light, Mr. Bragg’s assistant district attorney said in his own letter filed Tuesday that Mr. Trump will reconsider the court’s previous order of August 11, 2023. The defendant’s previous motion was dismissed, arguing that the defendant “does not recognize any change in circumstances” that would warrant a change in circumstances. evasive.
Marchan also separately on Wednesday denied Trump’s request to postpone the next trial until the Supreme Court rules on executive privilege.
The assistant district attorney rejected Mr. Trump’s claim that “Authentic used social media to tout its ties to President Biden and Vice President Harris while mocking President Trump.”
“Assuming this allegation is true, it merely repeats Defendants’ previous claims based on Authentic’s customer list,” Bragg’s office wrote. “This court and the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee have already determined that such claims are not grounds for dismissal.”
New York judge rejects President Trump’s request to postpone hush money trial until Scotus rules on immunity are over
In August 2023, a court said Trump had only presented a “speculative and hypothetical scenario,” but lawyers for the former president said Monday that Trump would then certify that he would become the Republican presidential nominee. He claimed that these scenarios had “become a reality”. 2024.
Former President Donald Trump and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg will face off in an upcoming hush money trial in New York City. (Getty Images)
“Mr. Authentic and His Royal Highness’ Daughter make money by helping create and disseminate campaign advocacy for President Trump’s opponents, political opponents, and the Democratic Party,” Trump’s lawyers said in a statement. . “Authentic’s commercial interests undermined President Trump’s criminal interests, and by demanding that he prepare for and go to trial during the general election, he was able to derail his efforts from conducting a leading presidential campaign.” We can no longer ignore the fact that they are profiting from this development of events that distracts from their actions.”
“Since the indictment was returned, Authentic has received millions of dollars in payments from groups affiliated with President Trump’s political opponents,” Trump’s lawyers said in a filing with the Federal Election Commission. , claimed that “some of those funds were paid to Authentic by groups associated with members of Congress.” So does his PAC, which used email and social media to solicit donations specifically based on the incident. ” As such, they argued that “there is strong evidence that Authentic took advantage of this litigation to make money,” and “those profits and continuing financial benefits cannot be ignored.”
House Republican speaker calls on President Trump’s gag judge to surrender following latest gag order, alleging ‘judicial bias’
Former President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media in Manhattan Criminal Court on Monday, March 25, 2024 in New York. (Brendan McDiarmid/Reuters/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
But Bragg’s team cited that language in Tuesday’s rebuttal, saying, “Defendant’s own careful language makes multiple factual leaps here that undermine the direct connection between Authentic and this case.” It has been made clear that Authentic receives money from “organizations.” Those organizations are.” There were connections to politicians, and those politicians raised money based on this case. ”
“This string of innuendos falls short of evidence that this court has a ‘direct, personal, material, financial interest in reaching a particular conclusion,'” the assistant district attorney wrote. “There is nothing new here that would change this court’s previous conclusion that there is nothing directly of benefit to Authentic or our family, let alone this case.”
The Trump campaign also said that despite Marchan issuing a gag order and subsequent extension that prevented the alleged Republican candidate from “giving protected campaign speech,” the court found “extrajudicial action in this case.” He criticized the court for making “comments”.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg returns to court during a hearing to set the date for former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial on March 25, 2024 in New York City. (Mary Altafer/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
In short, Mr. Trump’s team challenged the court’s use of the Administrative Office to issue statements relating to the X account that Mr. Marchand’s daughter was using at one point.
“As public scrutiny of these issues has increased, the accounts in question appear to have been closed to the public, as has Mr. Authentic’s X account, thereby limiting President Trump’s ability to investigate these matters. “There is,” they wrote.
They quoted a court spokeswoman as saying that Marchan’s daughter does not own the X account, which recently appeared to have shared photos of the former Republican president while in prison. Bragg’s office responded: “To the extent the defendant intends to seek dismissal based on the cited articles, such a request would be a frivolous and vexatious effort to further waste the court’s time.” wrote.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Prosecutors said that, apart from President Trump’s admission of “enthusiastic” preparations, they did not note that the article reported that “Mr. Marchand did not want to talk about the incident.” “We did not report that the court was talking about this case when it was reported.” “We don’t have an agenda here. We want to follow the law,” he said.
“Even if the court had this case in mind, expressing a broad commitment to impartiality is not a prohibited ‘comment on pending or impending litigation,'” Bragg’s team wrote. is clear and cannot be grounds for dismissal.”
