Trump points to Hunter Biden pardon in new attempt to overturn his hush money conviction
Trump's legal team argued that he is experiencing the same kind of political prosecution that Joe Biden condemned when he granted a pardon to his son.
TroibNews 
NEW YORK — Donald Trump is attempting to leverage the Hunter Biden pardon for his own legal and political advantage.
In his recent effort to overturn his criminal conviction in the Manhattan hush money case, Trump has frequently referenced President Joe Biden’s rationale for pardoning his son. His legal team contends that Trump is facing similar politically motivated prosecutions that Biden criticized in his pardon announcement.
This argument surfaced in a 69-page court filing released on Tuesday, where Trump’s attorneys laid out their case for dismissing the hush money matter now that Trump is the president-elect. They had earlier hinted at these arguments in a communication to the presiding judge, Justice Juan Merchan, soon after the election.
The latest document, which at times resembles a grievance-filled Trump campaign speech rather than a formal legal brief, features Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, asserting that Biden’s claims regarding Hunter Biden being “selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted” and “treated differently” serve as an “extraordinary condemnation of President Biden’s own DOJ.”
Blanche and Bove have been appointed by Trump to key roles in the Justice Department for his anticipated second term.
While the Justice Department was not responsible for prosecuting the hush money case against Trump — in which a jury found him guilty in May of 34 felony counts related to falsifying documents to conceal a hush money payment to a porn star during the final stretch of the 2016 election — it was addressed by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office. Trump’s attorneys claimed, however, that the Justice Department had targeted him through two federal cases led by special counsel Jack Smith and allegedly by having sent a prosecutor, Matthew Colangelo, to Bragg’s office to pursue what they labeled as “this empty and lawless case.”
Colangelo was hired by Bragg in December 2022, and Trump was indicted in the hush money case the following spring. There is no evidence supporting the assertion that the Justice Department assigned Colangelo to Bragg's team, despite Trump’s continuous claims.
The conviction for hush money violations carries a potential sentence of up to four years in prison. Although Trump was scheduled to be sentenced late last month, Merchan chose to postpone the sentencing indefinitely while considering Trump’s motion to dismiss the case.
As previously argued, Blanche and Bove contended that continuing the case would unconstitutionally obstruct Trump's transition back to the White House. They stated that not dismissing the case immediately could lead to “the type of ‘factional strife’ that President Biden decried in yesterday’s blanket pardon announcement.”
“Burdening the Presidency with a biased prosecution by a local prosecutor would be not only unconstitutional, but also unbearably undemocratic to the people of this country who chose President Trump as their leader,” they stated.
Alongside specific claims regarding why the case should not advance due to Trump’s election, the filing also encapsulates Trump’s long-held grievances about the prosecution and Bragg’s office, addressing Colangelo's role, Bragg’s performance, and what Trump has described as improper handling of the case by Merchan due to alleged conflicts of interest.
The filing presents the prosecution as a conspiracy against Trump, alleging it tried to elicit false testimony from its main witness, former Trump fixer Michael Cohen, while also suppressing testimony from former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg by convincing him to plead guilty to perjury in an unrelated matter.
Despite Bragg’s office suggesting that Trump’s sentencing might be postponed until after he leaves office in January 2029, Trump’s lawyers rejected this option, arguing that “[w]ith respect to presidential immunity, it would be egregious and unlawful for this Court to hold the prospect of a 2029 sentencing over President Trump’s head while he continues his service to this Country.”
In a reference to Biden’s pardon, Trump’s legal team stated, “As President Biden put it yesterday, ‘Enough is enough.’ This case, which should never have been brought, must now be dismissed.”
Bragg's office is expected to respond to Trump's arguments next week.
Max Fischer for TROIB News
In his recent effort to overturn his criminal conviction in the Manhattan hush money case, Trump has frequently referenced President Joe Biden’s rationale for pardoning his son. His legal team contends that Trump is facing similar politically motivated prosecutions that Biden criticized in his pardon announcement.
This argument surfaced in a 69-page court filing released on Tuesday, where Trump’s attorneys laid out their case for dismissing the hush money matter now that Trump is the president-elect. They had earlier hinted at these arguments in a communication to the presiding judge, Justice Juan Merchan, soon after the election.
The latest document, which at times resembles a grievance-filled Trump campaign speech rather than a formal legal brief, features Trump’s lawyers, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, asserting that Biden’s claims regarding Hunter Biden being “selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted” and “treated differently” serve as an “extraordinary condemnation of President Biden’s own DOJ.”
Blanche and Bove have been appointed by Trump to key roles in the Justice Department for his anticipated second term.
While the Justice Department was not responsible for prosecuting the hush money case against Trump — in which a jury found him guilty in May of 34 felony counts related to falsifying documents to conceal a hush money payment to a porn star during the final stretch of the 2016 election — it was addressed by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office. Trump’s attorneys claimed, however, that the Justice Department had targeted him through two federal cases led by special counsel Jack Smith and allegedly by having sent a prosecutor, Matthew Colangelo, to Bragg’s office to pursue what they labeled as “this empty and lawless case.”
Colangelo was hired by Bragg in December 2022, and Trump was indicted in the hush money case the following spring. There is no evidence supporting the assertion that the Justice Department assigned Colangelo to Bragg's team, despite Trump’s continuous claims.
The conviction for hush money violations carries a potential sentence of up to four years in prison. Although Trump was scheduled to be sentenced late last month, Merchan chose to postpone the sentencing indefinitely while considering Trump’s motion to dismiss the case.
As previously argued, Blanche and Bove contended that continuing the case would unconstitutionally obstruct Trump's transition back to the White House. They stated that not dismissing the case immediately could lead to “the type of ‘factional strife’ that President Biden decried in yesterday’s blanket pardon announcement.”
“Burdening the Presidency with a biased prosecution by a local prosecutor would be not only unconstitutional, but also unbearably undemocratic to the people of this country who chose President Trump as their leader,” they stated.
Alongside specific claims regarding why the case should not advance due to Trump’s election, the filing also encapsulates Trump’s long-held grievances about the prosecution and Bragg’s office, addressing Colangelo's role, Bragg’s performance, and what Trump has described as improper handling of the case by Merchan due to alleged conflicts of interest.
The filing presents the prosecution as a conspiracy against Trump, alleging it tried to elicit false testimony from its main witness, former Trump fixer Michael Cohen, while also suppressing testimony from former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg by convincing him to plead guilty to perjury in an unrelated matter.
Despite Bragg’s office suggesting that Trump’s sentencing might be postponed until after he leaves office in January 2029, Trump’s lawyers rejected this option, arguing that “[w]ith respect to presidential immunity, it would be egregious and unlawful for this Court to hold the prospect of a 2029 sentencing over President Trump’s head while he continues his service to this Country.”
In a reference to Biden’s pardon, Trump’s legal team stated, “As President Biden put it yesterday, ‘Enough is enough.’ This case, which should never have been brought, must now be dismissed.”
Bragg's office is expected to respond to Trump's arguments next week.
Max Fischer for TROIB News
