Trump slapped GAG order in Stormy Daniels hush money case to stop him from attacking staff and witnesses after lashing out at judge’s daughter

A New York judge has imposed a gag order on Donald Trump after he used his social media platform to attack the prosecutors in the Stormy Daniels case as well as the judge and his daughter.

The gag imposed by Judge Juan Merchan prohibits the former president from making statements about witnesses, prosecutors or their relatives if the intention is to interfere in the case.

It comes after Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg sought the order on Feb. 22 by citing Trump’s “long history” of pursuing witnesses, prosecutors and judges.

Merchan is taking a page from New York Judge Arthur Engoron, who issued a series of silence orders against Trump after attacks on himself, says AG Letitia James, and the judge’s chief clerk.

“The uncontested record reflecting defendant’s prior out-of-court statements constitutes a sufficient risk to the administration of justice,” he wrote.

Former President Donald Trump attacked the judge who oversaw the Stormy Daniels case, while also going after his daughter. Judge Juan Merchan then gave him a gag order

“His statements were threatening, inflammatory and derogatory,” wrote Merchan, who has a reputation for not allowing disruptions in his courtroom. His four-page order refers to attacks on “a family member.”

Trump has found ways to undermine the jokes, as he has done with his four criminal trials — blasting his efforts to muzzle him as a form of censorship.

The latest order prevents Trump from commenting on witnesses, attorneys and other court personnel, the judge or family members, although it does allow him to continue bashing District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

In his order, Merchan notes that “the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment and the state’s interest in due process” are involved in the remedy plaintiffs seek.

It holds that Trump both made and “directed others” to make public statements about “known or foreseeable witnesses” in the case, which would apply to former Trump fixer Michael Cohen, who Trump has ratted named.

Restricts out-of-court statements about cousnel to the prosecutor, judicial staff, counsel’s family members, or staff with the “intent to materially interfere with” the work on the case. It also applies to statements about any prospective jurors or jurors in the proceedings.

It all came after Trump scolded the man overseeing the Stormy Daniels trial a day after Judge Juan Merchan set an April trial date despite an attempt by Trump’s lawyers to dismiss the case.

Trump was with Merchan in a Manhattan courtroom on Monday as lawyers argued over the start of his first criminal trial, now set for April 15. On Tuesday, he launched multiple online attacks on judges and prosecutors, even calling Merchan a “distinguished-looking man.” .’

He targeted Merchan’s daughter and complained about the treatment of former Trump Organization chief Allen Weisselberg, who pleaded guilty this month to lying under oath without consenting to cooperate. It comes after his repeated attacks in his separate fraud trial in New York prompted Judge Arthur Engoron to impose a ‘gag’ order banning him from attacking his chief clerk.

“Judge Juan Merchan, a very distinguished looking man, is nevertheless a true and certified Trump Hater who suffers from a very severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Trump wrote.

‘In other words, he hates me! His daughter is a senior executive at a super-liberal Democratic firm that works for Adam “Shifty” Schiff, the Democrat National Committee, (Dem)Senate Majority PAC and even Crooked Joe Biden,” Trump wrote.

Trump’s lawyers tried to force Merchan off the case last year by citing his daughter’s work for Authentic Campaigns, a digital advocacy firm, but were denied.

Trump then went after Merchan for his role in overseeing the Weisselberg case. (He also oversaw the criminal fraud case of former Trump campaign chairman Steve Bannon).

Merchan showed his tough side when Weisselberg was sentenced, telling him that if he hadn’t already agreed to a five-month prison sentence, he would have gone for something “much bigger.”

Trump Rant Against Judge Juan Merchan, Calling Him 'Distinguished Looking'

Trump Rant Against Judge Juan Merchan, Calling Him ‘Distinguished Looking’

Trump quit after a crucial hearing in his hush money case, with his lawyers demanding the case be postponed for months

Trump quit after a crucial hearing in his hush money case, with his lawyers demanding the case be postponed for months

Trump, 77, lamented the matter without directly saying he was referring to the longtime Trump executive first appointed by his father, Fred Trump, calling the 76-year-old Weisselberg “elderly and not in good health.”

“He recently served as judge in an unrelated trial against a long-term employee, elderly and not in good health. This judge treated him cruelly and told him: either you cooperate or I will put you in prison for fifteen years. He pleaded guilty and went to jail for very minor crimes, highly unusual, spent four months in Rikers, and now they’re after him again, this time for alleged lies (doesn’t look like a lie to me!), and they threatened him again by 15 years if he doesn’t say something bad about “TRUMP.” He is devastated and scared! These land-destroying villains and criminals have no case against me. WITCH HUNT!’

Trump was in Merchan’s courtroom as his team tried to dismiss or delay the trial on charges of falsifying corporate records related to the $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels, who claims she had an affair with Trump. They said they needed more time after prosecutors released more than 100,000 pages of evidence.

But Merchan rejected the plea after a tense hearing in which he sparred with Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche.

Prosecutors “went so far beyond what was expected of them that it’s actually strange that we even take the time here,” the judge said.

Merchan considered Trump’s motion last year to have him withdraw from the case, addressing arguments about his daughter, including the claim that she could “benefit financially” from the court’s decisions.

‘The suspect has not shown that there are concrete, or even realistic reasons for considering the refusal appropriate, let alone that it is required on these grounds. The speculative and hypothetical scenarios offered by the suspect fall far short of the legal standard,” Merchan wrote.