Outspoken ESPN analyst Stephen A. Smith is no stranger to controversy, but his latest remarks have ignited heated debates across the political spectrum. On Monday, Smith criticized Judge Juan Merchan’s decision to schedule President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing for January 10—just ten days before his historic inauguration as the 47th president of the United States.
The sentencing follows Trump’s conviction on 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records, stemming from payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during his 2016 campaign. However, Smith argued that the timing and nature of the case appeared politically charged, questioning its relevance and practicality.
Speaking on The Stephen A. Smith Show, the commentator didn’t hold back:
“This is the kind of stuff that just validates assertions about things being politicized,” Smith said. “What is the purpose of this? Are you going to jail him? Fine him? Or is this just about dragging his name through the mud?”
Smith pointed out the unusual timing, with the sentencing occurring mere days before Trump’s inauguration. He suggested the move served little purpose beyond creating a spectacle to tarnish Trump’s reputation.
The charges against Trump revolve around alleged efforts to conceal payments to Daniels via falsified business records. While critics have called the charges serious, Smith questioned their gravity, comparing them to commonplace nondisclosure agreements.
“Thirty-four felony counts … sounds very, very damaging. It’s a hush-money case,” Smith remarked. “This is about a former porn star and financial arrangements to keep her quiet. That’s what all this boils down to?”
Smith’s skepticism reflects a broader conservative critique of Trump’s legal troubles. Many argue that such cases are designed not to pursue justice but to damage Trump politically—a sentiment echoed by Trump’s legal team and supporters.
Smith’s criticism didn’t stop with the case itself. He also took aim at Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over the trial, and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who opposed Trump’s motion to dismiss the charges.
“You’re Juan Merchan … the state Supreme Court justice in New York. And you want to sentence him next Friday?” Smith questioned. “What is the sentencing even about?”
Smith also blasted Bragg’s suggestion of using an abatement mechanism—typically applied when a defendant dies between conviction and sentencing—to sideline the case, calling it an unnecessary and politically motivated step.
“Did you get him? Did you put him in jail? Did you prevent him from winning the election? No, you did not,” Smith said. “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’s remarks highlight the growing frustration among conservatives regarding what they view as the weaponization of the legal system against political opponents. Trump’s legal team has consistently argued that the charges are baseless and designed to undermine his presidency.
Supporters see Trump’s legal battles as part of a broader effort to disrupt his political career. This sentiment was evident when Smith referenced Trump’s recent political influence, including his pivotal role in securing Mike Johnson’s election as Speaker of the House.
Despite the drama surrounding the sentencing, it’s unlikely to impede Trump’s upcoming presidency. Smith emphasized that Trump remains fully capable of fulfilling his duties, regardless of the January 10 proceedings.
“This isn’t going to stop him,” Smith declared. “He’s going to take office, sign laws, and do the job he was elected to do.”
WATCH:
As Trump’s inauguration nears, the case continues to fuel debates about the fairness and motivations behind legal proceedings targeting high-profile figures. Critics argue that Trump’s opponents are more interested in optics than justice, using legal challenges as tools to smear him before taking office.
Smith’s comments resonate with a growing number of Americans who are skeptical about the politicization of the legal system. For conservatives, his criticism underscores a broader point: the need for fairness and impartiality in a judicial system that appears increasingly entangled with partisan politics.
As the January 10 sentencing date approaches, it’s clear that Trump’s legal battles won’t end with this case. However, the resilience of his base and the vocal support of commentators like Stephen A. Smith demonstrate that Trump’s influence remains undiminished—even in the face of relentless opposition.
The post Stephen A. Smith Slams Timing of Trump’s Sentencing Before Inauguration appeared first on Daily News Cycle.
