To ensure that President-elect Trump takes office as an officially convicted felon, Judge Juan Merchan has apparently rejected Trump’s post-trial requests and is proposing to sentence him next Friday, January 10th.

The bait for Trump to agree to this is for Judge Merchan to signal that the verdict will be out conditional dismissal — meaning the president-elect would face no prison time and no post-conviction supervision (e.g. probation). Additionally, because imposition of the sentence and promulgation of the sentence would end the trial court case, Trump would be free to appeal 34 felony convictions for falsifying business records.

I don’t think Trump will agree to this; Instead, I suspect he will immediately appeal the immunity claims, which Merchan definitively rejected in today’s 18-page opinion and order. Not surprisingly, Merchan has dismissed Trump’s claims of immunity; He had already decided against Trump on this point in a statement on December 16th.

NEW YORK JUDGE MAKES TRUMP VERDICT DAYS BEFORE INAUGURAL

In previous proceedings, Alvin Bragg, the progressive Democratic district attorney-elect in Manhattan, appeared to acknowledge that Trump would likely have the right to appeal an immunity decision against him before his conviction. That’s no doubt why, instead of pushing for a sentencing date, Bragg’s prosecutors have suggested freezing the case – putting it on hold while Trump served his four-year term as president. In this scenario, the case would theoretically resume in 2029 (when Trump would be 82) with final judgment, imposition of sentence and sentencing, and appeal.

In Friday afternoon’s decision, Merchan rejected that suggestion, claiming he had a responsibility to convict Trump before his inauguration lest it undermine what the judge described as an important public interest in imposing the sentence.

It is not clear to me that such a public interest exists. Instead, there appears to be an interest on the part of Merchan – an activist Democrat who contributed to Joe Biden’s campaign against Trump in 2020, violating the state’s judicial ethics rules – in ensuring that Trump is branded a convicted felon, While there is still an opportunity, namely before the inauguration, to make this possible.

Still, Merchan seems to acknowledge that Trump still has his cards in the game. For example, the statement states:

“This court must sentence the defendant within a reasonable time after the verdict; and the defendant must be permitted to pursue any available remedy, a course which he has clearly stated he intends to pursue but which will only be successful.” full available after sentencing. (Emphasis added.)”

Set aside for a moment the value of this demonstrably hostile judge expressing his deep concerns about enforcing Trump’s appeal rights. Merchan has to throw in the word “full” because while Trump cannot make his full appeal based on any claims of error arising from the trial until after the verdict is announced, he should be able to file a partial appeal that is now directed solely against Merchan’s immunity decision.

TRUMP BEATS MERCHAN, DEMOCRATS WHO ‘JUST WANT TO SEE IF THEY CAN GET A POUND OF MEAT’ amid failed cases

Merchan then addresses Bragg’s suggestion that the case be let rest for four years: “(I) if the court is unable to impose a sentence before the defendant has taken his oath of office (on Jan. 20), then this may be the only viable option.”

Again, Merchan clearly understands that Trump may be allowed to immediately appeal the immunity portion of the ruling. If that happens, Merchan would actually be “unable to impose a sentence before Inauguration Day” — in which case Trump would not be a convicted felon when he takes office.

What I find most remarkable about all of this is Merchan’s description of Trump’s offense:

“Here, 12 jurors unanimously found the defendant guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business documents with the intent to defraud. This included intent to commit or conceal a conspiracy to promote a presidential election by unlawful means. It was the deliberate and continuous deception by the leader of the free world that represents the gravity of this offense. (Emphasis added.) To overturn this verdict on the grounds that the charges are not serious enough given the position the defendant once held and will now assume again (i.e., the presidency) would represent a disproportionate result and immeasurable harm to citizens inflict trust in the rule of law.”

Here Merchan completely swallows Bragg’s presentation of the case: We’re not just talking about falsifying business records; Trump conspired to steal the 2016 election – a conspiracy that succeeded!

CLICK HERE FOR MORE OPINIONS ON FOX NEWS

Now let us leave aside the fact that this is not the case in the indictment. Let’s put aside that it’s a ridiculous claim – that is, even if we assume for the sake of argument that, as Bragg claimed, Trump’s $130,000 non-disclosure agreement (NDA) to Stormy Daniels was a campaign expense, which had to be reported to the federal election Although this was not the case, it should only have been reported after the election – which means: It was not illegally withheld from voters. And let’s put that aside: Since Merchan (in violation of due process) did not seek a unanimous verdict on the crime that Trump allegedly concealed by falsifying his business records, it cannot fairly be said – as the judge claims – that 12 jurors unanimously decided that he conspired to steal the election.

Putting all that aside, if one really believed, as Merchan says, that Trump demonstrably conspired to steal a presidential election — and in the process abused his status as “leader of the free world,” the judge adds significantly – then How could a responsible judge in good conscience sentence Trump to a sentence of no prison and no parole? As described by Merchan, this was a heinous crime for the ages.

Of course, Merchan doesn’t really believe that. How could he? This was, at best, a trivial, time-barred misdemeanor of keeping records of a legal transaction (NDAs are legal and customary), which Bragg – with enormous help from Merchan – compounded into 34 felony counts by pretending to enforce federal campaign finance laws , which a prosecutor does not have the authority to enforce (and which the relevant federal authorities have concluded that Trump did not violate).

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The American people just elected Donald Trump president not only with a majority of the Electoral College, but also by a popular margin. The public knew full well about Bragg’s absurd criminal case in Manhattan.

Clearly there is no public call for Trump to be convicted before he assumes the highest office in the land. Instead, progressive Democrats in New York have a malicious interest in branding the Republican president-elect a convicted felon.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM ANDREW McCARTHY