Trump Attorneys Take Another Shot at Hush Money Dismissal

It would appear that Donald Trump and his attorneys are prepared to go to the wall in terms of trying to get Alvin Bragg’s hush money case dismissed.

The latest effort alleged “grave juror misconduct.”

The filing was heavily redacted when it was released, so we are still looking for more clarification on the allegations by Trump’s legal team.

Juror Misconduct

Trump’s attorneys filed on December 3, but their motion was only recently unsealed, albeit heavily redacted.

Trump attorneys Todd Blanche and Emil Bove argued, "The extensive and pervasive misconduct at issue violated President Trump's rights under the federal Constitution and New York law.”

The filing was made after one of the jurors reportedly reached out to Trump’s legal team to make them aware of what allegedly took place.

Upon releasing the redacted letter, Judge Merchan stated the claims contained were "unsworn and admittedly contested statements.”

He further stated that the redactions were made to protect jurors for potential threats being made in regard to the filing.

This motion too, will fail, however, because Trump’s attorneys did not get the statements under oath.

Judge Merchan explained, “Allegations of juror misconduct should be thoroughly investigated. However, this Court is prohibited from deciding such claims on the basis of mere hearsay and conjecture.

"Such a motion 'must contain sworn allegations.'"

Trump does have more legal options, which were explained by Merchan, so this may come down to whether Trump’s attorneys can get their whistleblower to come forward and testify under oath or not.

Merchan even stated, "Should a properly filed claim be submitted, these redactions will be revisited."

Once again, I have to ask what is going on with Trump’s attorneys that led them to file such a motion without a formal deposition.

Trump has repeatedly and wrongly attempted to get his case dismissed due to presidential immunity.

As I have stated many times, presidential immunity does not have any relevance here because Trump was not in office when the acts were committed.

Furthermore, even if Trump was the sitting president at the time, his business activities have nothing to do with his duties as president, so they do not fall under the protection of presidential immunity.

To me, it is just absurd that he continues to pound this when immunity is clearly not relevant here.