President Donald Trump’s legal team filed a ‘powerhouse’ appeal in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against him, demanding the verdict be thrown out and that the ‘most politically charged prosecution in our Nation’s history,’ as they called it, be dismissed altogether.

Fox News Digital obtained the 111-page appeal filed in New York Supreme Court’s Appellate Division late Monday night.

Sullivan & Cromwell’s Robert J. Giuffra Jr. is representing the president in the matter.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree but was found guilty in May after a six-week unprecedented criminal trial in New York in 2025.  

New York v. Trump is on a halt until 2029.

‘President Trump’s legal team filed a powerhouse appeal in the Manhattan DA’s Witch Hunt, as the President continues his fight to put an end to the Radical Democrat Lawfare once and for all,’ a spokesman for the president’s legal team told Fox News Digital.

‘The Supreme Court’s historic decision on Immunity, the Federal and New York State Constitutions, and other established legal precedent mandate that this meritless hoax be immediately overturned and dismissed,’ the Trump spokesman continued.

‘President Trump will keep defeating Democrat weaponization at every turn as he focused on his singular mission to Make America Great Again.’

The 111-page filing details Giuffra’s argument for complete dismissal and reversal. 

‘This is the most politically charged prosecution in our Nation’s history,’ the filing states. ‘After years of fruitless investigation into decade-old, baseless allegations — and under immense political pressure to criminally charge President Donald J. Trump for something—New York’s district attorney (DANY) manufactured felony charges against a once-former and now-sitting President of the United States. The DA, a Democrat, brought those charges in the middle of a contentious Presidential election in which President Trump was the leading Republican candidate.’

Trump’s legal team called the charges against Trump ‘as unprecedented as their political context.’

‘Targeting alleged conduct that has never been found to violate any New York law, the DA concocted a purported felony by stacking time-barred misdemeanors under a convoluted legal theory, which the DA then improperly obscured until the charge conference,’ the filing states. ‘This case should never have seen the inside of a courtroom, let alone resulted in a conviction.’

Trump’s lawyers are asking the court to ‘now reverse.’

‘Federal law expressly preempts DANY’s misdemeanor-turned-felony charges because those charges rest on an alleged violation of federal campaign regulations that States cannot (and have never) enforced,’ the filing states. ‘The trial was fatally marred by the introduction of 2 official Presidential acts that the Supreme Court has made clear cannot be used as evidence against a President.’

Trump’s lawyers went on to argue that ‘the jury was instructed incorrectly, allowing a conviction without the unanimity required by both New York law and basic due process.’

‘Beyond these fatal flaws, the evidence was clearly insufficient to convict,’ the filing states. ‘In addition to all this overwhelming error, the trial was conducted by a judge who refused to recuse himself despite having made political contributions to President Trump’s electoral opponents and despite having disqualifying family conflicts. For each of these independent reasons, President Trump’s conviction must be set aside.’ 

Trump’s attorneys also noted that the review of the by federal prosecutors in 2021 led to ‘no actions against President Trump even after he left office in 2021,’ which ‘should have barred any prosecution’ in the Manhattan district attorney’s efforts.

Trump attorneys also argued that the trial court violated the presidential evidentiary immunity confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which bars the ‘use of evidence about’ a president’s official acts while in office.

‘The jury improperly heard extensive testimony about at least four different kinds of official acts by President Trump,’ the filing states, including discussions between the president and the White House communications director in the Oval Office over the White House’s response to allegations of presidential wrongdoing; official presidential statements on social media; alleged discussions between the president and the attorney general about the enforcement of federal campaign regulations; and the president’s practices in discharging his presidential duties, including from the Situation Room.

‘The U.S. Supreme Court mandated that violations of Presidential evidentiary immunity require automatic reversal of a conviction without any harmless-error analysis,’ the filing states. ‘Even if such analysis were applied, the introduction of the prohibited testimony—which DANY repeatedly relied on and called ‘devastating’ in its summation, A7815—was far from harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.’

Trump attorneys also argued that the trial court ‘erred in instructing the jury that it could convict President Trump of having conspired to ‘promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means,’ Election Law § 17-152, without unanimously agreeing on what those ‘unlawful means’ actually were.’

‘Instead, the court permitted the jury to convict if some jurors believed only that President Trump had conspired to violate FECA, while others believed only that he had conspired to help others commit tax fraud, and still others believed only that he had conspired to help others make false statements to a 5 bank. Due process and Section 17-152 do not permit a conviction based on such a haphazard ‘combination of jury findings,’’ the filing states.

Trump lawyers also said the district attorney ‘had no proof that President Trump ever had the ‘intent to defraud’ expressly required by the business-records statute.’

‘There was zero evidence that President Trump intended to deprive anyone of money or property, and in fact no such deprivation occurred,’ the filing states. ‘Having no other choice, DANY advanced the flawed theory, erroneously blessed by the trial court, that ‘intent to defraud’ can include either (i) intent to interfere with unspecified government regulators, or (ii) intent to deceive ‘the voting public.’ Making matters worse, DANY did not prove that President Trump acted with either of those intentions in mind.’ 

The lawyers also argued that Judge Juan Merchan refused to recuse himself from the case, and questioned his impartiality due to his past political contributions — donating to both then-President Joe Biden and to a group called ‘Stop Republicans PAC.’

The lawyers also called into question, again, Merchan’s daughter’s work as the president and part-owner of an advertising company that was paid millions by the Kamala Harris campaign and other Democrats — ‘including for running advertisements specifically invoking DANY’s prosecution of President Trump in her father’s courtroom.’

Loren Merchan sits as the president for Authentic Campaigns — a company that has done political work for top Democrat clients like Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris. 

‘In the face of all these undisputed and damaging facts, Justice Merchan’s refusal to recuse created, at the very least, ‘the appearance of bias,’ which ‘erode(s) public confidence in the judicial system’ and is yet another clear ground for reversal,’ Trump lawyers argued.

Trump’s attorneys concluded by saying that ‘despite years of rifling through President Trump’s business, DANY could not find a felony charge.’

‘So it concocted an elaborate theory that has never before been pursued in this State and is plainly preempted by federal law,’ the filing states. ‘Like every criminal defendant in a New York courtroom, President Trump was entitled to a fair trial before a properly instructed jury and a neutral judge.’

‘Instead, he was convicted after a trial that featured repeated and clear violations of his constitutional rights, federal law, and New York law, presided over by a judge who was required to recuse,’ they argued. ‘For all these reasons, this Court should reverse the judgment of conviction and dismiss the indictment.’

President Donald Trump predicted that his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping would prove beneficial amid ongoing trade negotiations between the two countries during Trump’s Asia trip.

‘We’re going to be going to South Korea and, the following day, meeting with President Xi…that’s a big meeting and I think it’s going to work out very well, actually,’ Trump said during an event for business leaders at the U.S. ambassador’s residence in Tokyo Tuesday.

The White House said that Trump would meet with Xi Thursday during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit.

The meeting between the two leaders coincides with the two countries going head-to-head on trade issues. 

Tensions flared after Beijing announced Oct. 9 it would impose export controls on rare-earth magnets, which are used in products including electric cars to F-35 fighter jets. In turn, Trump said the U.S. would slap a new 100% tariff on all Chinese goods, which is scheduled to take effect Saturday. 

However, Trump sought to downplay any tensions and has spoken highly of his relationship with Xi in recent weeks. He also has expressed confidence both the U.S. and China will leave the meeting pleased and that they will strike a deal.

‘I think we are going to come out very well, and everyone’s going to be very happy,’ Trump said Thursday.

Trump and Xi have not met in person since Trump took office in January. They previously met in person in June 2019 in Japan.

Trump departed for Asia Friday and so far has visited Malaysia and Japan. His final stop before returning to Washington is South Korea.

Earlier Tuesday, Trump addressed U.S. service members aboard the aircraft carrier USS George Washington in Yokosuka, Japan. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth also attended, as did Japan’s newly elected Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi.

House Democrats accused President Donald Trump on Monday of attempting to use the Department of Justice to improperly pay himself for legal damages he has incurred over the past decade, and they demanded senior department officials recuse themselves from the matter.

In a public letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and senior official Stanley Woodward, House Judiciary Committee Democrats called the possible payout ‘a blatantly illegal and unconstitutional effort to steal’ millions of dollars from taxpayers.

Trump’s interest in the payout was first reported last week by the New York Times, which said Trump began seeking what amounted to $230 million through an administrative claims process that top DOJ officials would typically need to approve. Trump filed the claims in 2023 and 2024, before he took office, according to the report.

The committee Democrats, led by ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., warned of repercussions for paying Trump and demanded a slate of nonpublic information about Trump’s reported requests, laying the groundwork for a possible future investigation if they were to take the majority and gain subpoena power in a year.

‘You could face civil liability, ethics investigations, professional discipline, and potential criminal liability for conspiracy to defraud the United States,’ the lawmakers wrote.

They have been among many Democrats, and some Republicans, to scrutinize the president for potentially accepting the lump sum from a department he now runs.

Trump recently addressed the report in the Oval Office, saying ‘it would be awfully strange’ to pay himself. Trump is reportedly seeking payments for damages incurred by the DOJ’s investigations into alleged Trump-Russia collusion and former special counsel Jack Smith’s investigations.

‘In other words, did you ever have one of those cases where you have to decide how much you’re paying yourself in damages?’ Trump said. ‘But I was damaged very greatly. And any money that I would get, I would give to charity.’ 

House Democrats countered that Trump ‘does not get the right to take a bribe or kickback just by promising to give the proceeds to charity.’

They also demanded Blanche and Woodward, who worked on Trump’s legal defense team during his criminal prosecutions, recuse themselves from any decisions about compensating Trump.

Asked for comment, a spokesman for committee Republicans accused the Democrats of fixating too much on Trump.

‘Democrats should focus on opening the government and paying federal workers, many of whom live in Ranking Member Raskin’s district, rather than obsessing over President Trump who clearly did nothing wrong,’ committee spokesman Russell Dye said. ‘But sadly, their priority will always be attacking President Trump instead of paying the troops, air traffic controllers, and families who are hurting because of the Democrat shutdown.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the DOJ for comment.

Senate Democrats on Tuesday blocked Republicans’ 13th attempt to reopen the government after having nearly a week to mull their options — and with a series of pressure-point deadlines rapidly closing in.

On the 28th day of the shutdown, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., tried to advance the House-passed continuing resolution (CR) and was again foiled by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and the Democratic caucus.

Failure to reopen the government on Tuesday came as air traffic controllers missed their first payday. The military is set to miss its first full payday on Friday. Then there is the looming cliff for federal nutrition benefits on Saturday — the same day as open enrollment begins nationwide for Obamacare.

In the background, Republicans are considering a series of one-off bills to pay the troops, certain federal workers, air traffic controllers and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps, but whether they make it to the floor remains to be seen.

Thune threw cold water on the prospect of the piecemeal ‘rifle shots’ coming to the floor. Republicans will discuss the bills during their closed-door lunch later Tuesday, which will be attended by Vice President JD Vance.

‘There’s not a high level of interest in doing carve-outs or so-called rifle shots,’ he said. ‘Most people recognize the way to get out of this mess is to open up the government.’

Still, lawmakers with bills that could pay portions of the federal workforce were hopeful their legislation would get a shot. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, whose bill would pay air traffic controllers, said, ‘I certainly hope so,’ when asked if it would get a vote.

And Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., whose bill to pay working federal workers and the troops was blocked last week, but could get a second wind this week.

He and Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., are working at arm’s length — Johnson said they last spoke Friday — on a compromise version of the bill, but he wasn’t hopeful that it would see the light of day despite agreeing to concessions demanded by Democrats.

‘I want to make this permanent. Let’s stop, again, let’s take the ability to punish federal employees because of our dysfunction away forever. We’ll add furlough employees, and we’re not changing anything in terms of the president’s authority — that would be adjudicated in the court,’ Johnson said. ‘So the question is, will they take ‘yes’ for an answer?’

Schumer railed against Republicans ahead of the vote, and blamed President Donald Trump for being overseas this week as a reason that no forward progress was being made on reopening the government.

He also went after Thune for again bringing the same bill to the floor and reiterated that Democrats’ position, which is to get an ironclad deal to extend expiring Obamacare subsidies, hadn’t changed.

‘It’s a partisan bill and does nothing, most importantly, does nothing to solve the [Obamacare] crisis,’ Schumer said. ‘Just now, here on the floor, the Republican leaders seemed perplexed about what precisely it is that Democrats are pushing for. He knows damn well what Democrats want. It’s the very same thing that a vast majority of Americans want, including nearly 60% of MAGA voters. We want lower healthcare costs now.’

House Republicans held a lawmaker-only conference call on Tuesday that grew tense when Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., confronted Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., on his strategy to navigate the ongoing government shutdown.

Johnson has been holding weekly calls to keep GOP lawmakers updated on the shutdown while instructing them to remain in their home districts rather than in Washington.

It’s part of Johnson’s pressure strategy to force Senate Democrats into accepting the GOP’s federal funding plan.

However, Fox News Digital was told that Greene forcefully countered that Republicans’ House majority was ‘being wasted’ by staying in their districts.

She said House Republicans would be better served passing legislation in Washington and finding an ‘off ramp’ to COVID-19 pandemic-era Obamacare subsidies that are set to expire at the end of this year if a deal isn’t reached.

An extension of those subsidies has been Democrats’ main demand in exchange for agreeing to any funding deal.

‘You guys need to get out of Washington, D.C., and go back to your districts and talk to real people, because real people are pissed,’ Greene told House GOP leaders, Fox News Digital learned. ‘They expect us to do our legislative constitutional duty and not take marching orders from the political team at the White House.’

She turned her ire on President Donald Trump as well, pointing out she was one of his earliest fervent supporters but adding, ‘Even the president is losing support.’

Fox News Digital was told that Johnson defended Republicans’ legislative record so far as well as Trump’s popularity among the GOP base.

He also said he and other Republican leaders had been working tirelessly to end the shutdown, Fox News Digital was told.

‘He’s not sleeping. I’m not sleeping … because we are working around the clock,’ Johnson said.

Johnson then went further and criticized Greene for airing her concerns with the GOP’s direction on social media, asking her, ‘How does that help us, Marjorie?’

Several other House Republicans who spoke up defended Johnson’s handling of the shutdown, Fox News Digital was told.

Two notable exceptions were Reps. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., and Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, who Fox News Digital was told also raised concerns about keeping the House out.

The speaker has kept the House out of Washington since Sept. 19, when his chamber passed the GOP’s short-term funding bill to give lawmakers until Nov. 21 to reach a deal on government funding.

But Senate Democrats have since rejected that legislation 13 times.

Johnson argued on the call that Republicans were still busy at work despite not being in Washington, Fox News Digital was told.

And while Tuesday’s confrontation marks the first time Greene made her concerns known on the House GOP’s weekly shutdown calls, she has been vocal on social media about her frustration.

Greene even confirmed her side of the account on X while the call was ongoing.

‘I said I have no respect for the House not being in session passing our bills and the President’s executive orders. And I demanded to know from Speaker Johnson what the Republican plan for healthcare is to build the off-ramp off Obamacare and the [Affordable Care Act] tax credits to make health insurance affordable for Americans,’ Greene wrote.

‘Johnson said he’s got ideas and pages of policy ideas and committees of jurisdiction are working on it, but he refused to give one policy proposal to our GOP conference on our own conference call. Apparently I have to go into a [classified setting] to find out the Republican healthcare plan!!!’

Fox News Digital reached out to Johnson’s office and the White House for a response but did not immediately hear back.

Voters across the country will head to the polls on Tuesday, Nov. 4, to cast votes in pivotal elections that many will interpret as critical bellwethers of where the country stands politically almost a year into President Donald Trump’s second term and a year before the midterm elections.

Here are the top elections that people from across the country are watching closely.

Virginia gubernatorial race

Virginia’s Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears is squaring off against her Democratic opponent, former Rep. Abigail Spanberger, in a race to replace term-limited Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

The election comes with a handful of historic firsts, including Earle-Sears becoming the state’s first Black female nominee for governor in a race that ultimately will result in Virginia electing the first female governor, regardless of which party wins the general election.

While Spanberger has held the lead over Earle-Sears in a slew of surveys since the start of the year, polls tightened recently after explosive revelations in Virginia’s attorney general race rocked the campaign trail.

Attorney general candidate Jay Jones, a Democrat, has been in crisis mode since controversial three-year-old texts — where he compared then-Virginia House Speaker Todd Gilbert to mass murderers Adolf Hitler and Pol Pot. He said that if he was given two bullets, he would use both against the GOP lawmaker to shoot him in the head. Spanberger, and other prominent Democrats, have refused to call for Jones to drop out, which Republicans have labeled an example of Democrats tacitly condoning political violence. 

The race has drawn the attention of former President Barack Obama, who will head to Virginia Nov. 1 to headline a political rally for Spanberger in Norfolk after endorsing her in a pair of political ads earlier in October that took shots at Republicans. 

New Jersey gubernatorial race

Voters in New Jersey will also be voting for their next governor in a choice between Republican businessman Jack Ciattarelli and Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill, both running to succeed the term-limited Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy. 

Ciattarelli, who’s making his third straight run for Garden State governor and who nearly upset Murphy four years ago, fell short as plenty of Republican voters sat out the election.

In a state where registered Democrats still outnumber Republicans despite a GOP surge in registration this decade, four public opinion polls released over the past two weeks — from Fox News, Quinnipiac University, Fairleigh Dickinson University and Rutgers-Eagleton — indicated Ciattarelli tightening the margins with Sherrill in the race to succeed the term-limited Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy. Other public and internal surveys suggest a margin-of-error contest.

Sherrill, a U.S. Naval Academy graduate who flew helicopters during her military service and who was first elected to Congress in 2018, has campaigned hard on linking Ciattarelli to Trump while Ciattarelli has linked Sherrill to the Biden administration’s policies and hammered her on questions swirling about her connection to a cheating scandal at the Naval Academy. 

Virginia and New Jersey are the only states that hold gubernatorial contests in the year after a presidential election. And the elections, which traditionally grab outsized national attention, are viewed this year as early verdicts on President Donald Trump’s unprecedented and relentless second-term agenda, as well as key barometers ahead of next year’s midterm showdowns for the U.S. House and Senate.

California redistricting

Early voting is now underway in California in a special election that will make a huge impact on next year’s battle for the U.S. House majority.

California voters are deciding whether to pass a ballot proposition this November which would dramatically alter the state’s congressional districts, putting the left-leaning state front-and-center in the high-stakes political fight over redistricting that pits President Donald Trump and the GOP against the Democrats.

California state lawmakers this summer approved a special proposition on the November ballot to obtain voter approval to temporarily sidetrack the state’s nonpartisan redistricting commission and return the power to draw the congressional maps to the Democrat-dominated legislature. 

The effort in California, which could create five more Democratic-leaning congressional districts, aims to counter the passage in the reliable red state of Texas of a new map that aims to create up to five right-leaning House seats. Failure to approve what’s known as Proposition 50 would be a stinging setback for Democrats.

Proponents and opponents of Proposition 50 reported raising more than $215 million as of Oct. 2, with much of the money being dished out to pay for a deluge of ads on both sides.

One of the two main groups countering Newsom and the Democrats is labeling their effort ‘Stop Sacramento’s Power Grab.’

Also getting into the fight is former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was the last Republican governor of California.

‘That’s what they want to do is take us backwards — this is why it is important for you to vote no on Prop 50,’ Schwarzenegger says in an ad against Proposition 50. ‘Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.’

New York City mayoral race

The nation’s largest city will be voting for its next mayor on Nov. 4 as socialist Zohran Mamdani holds a commanding lead in the polls against former Dem. Gov. Andrew Cuomo, running as an independent after losing the primary to Mamdani, and Republican Curtis Sliwa. 

Mamdani has faced strong criticism for a variety of positions he adopted over the years as a member of New York City’s chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, including calls to defund the police, seize the means of production, and abolish private property. 

Despite being labeled a communist by some and prominent Jewish leaders speaking out against his anti-Israel positions, Mamdani’s focus on ‘affordability’ in the city, with agenda items such as freezing rent rates, has appealed to younger voters and catapulted him to the top of the polls with a week to go before the election. 

Cuomo and Sliwa, who have both called on each other multiple times to drop out of the race to give voters a one-on-one match-up with Mamdani, have made the case that Mamdani’s inexperience and controversial views make him unqualified to lead New York City, a city of over 8 million people. 

Minneapolis mayoral race 

In Minnesota, a Mamdani-esque figure is running for mayor of Minneapolis: Omar Fateh, the son of immigrant parents from Somalia who five years ago became the first Somali-American elected to the Minnesota Senate.

Fateh has pledged, if elected mayor, to raise the city’s minimum wage, increase the supply of affordable housing, and combat what he calls police violence. Similar to Mamdani, Fateh calls for replacing some of the police department’s duties with community-led alternatives. He also wants to issue legal IDs to undocumented immigrants.

Fateh, like Mamdani, is a democratic socialist and a Muslim. And at age 35, he’s also a member of Generation Y.

Fateh’s most notable opponent in November is the current mayor, Jacob Frey, running for a third term.

Fox News Digital’s Emma Colton contributed to this report.