Donald Trump has been warned that he could face jail time on numerous occasions, particularly for violating the gag orders imposed on him.
On Monday, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan — who's presiding over the former president's criminal hush money trial — "ruled on the tenth allegation of Donald Trump violating his gag order, finding" Trump "in criminal contempt of court."
According to MSNBC's Jordan Rubin's latest column, the judge's ruling "is the latest one immediately favoring the defense that may benefit the prosecution in the long run."
READ MORE: Judge hands Trump 'incarceration' threat as experts say next time he’ll toss him in jail
Merchan warned the next time the ex-president violates the order, he may find himself behind bars, but Rubin emphasizes the judge's two latest "rulings are the most recent evidence that this isn’t the witch hunt Trump paints it as."
The Guardian reports Merchan told Trump directly, "As you know, the prosecution has filed three separate motions to find you in criminal contempt. It appears that the $1,000 fines are not a deterrent."
ABC News reports Merchan also told the MAGA hopeful, "Mr. Trump, last thing I want to do is put you in jail, you are the former president of the United States, and possibly the next president as well."
Rubin writes, "Recall that prosecutors had asked Merchan last week to find that Trump had violated the gag order four more times. The judge agreed on one of the allegations, regarding a Trump statement about the jury; Merchan said the remarks raised the specter of fear for the safety of jurors and their loved ones. The judge declined to hold Trump in contempt for statements about key witnesses Michael Cohen and David Pecker."
The Deadline: Legal Blog writer notes that "Monday’s gag order ruling is the latest instance of Merchan not giving the prosecution everything it has asked for," writing, "On Friday, prosecutors argued that they should be able to cross-examine Trump on his then-most-recent gag order violations if he testifies. The defense argued that it would be unfair to bring that up in front of the jury. Merchan agreed, reasoning that it would be hard for the jury to look past the fact that the same judge presiding over the case had held Trump in contempt.'
READ MORE: 'All for show': How Trump uses his family during hush money trial
Rubin concludes, "Merchan has built a body of difference-splitting rulings that would be harder for Trump to challenge on appeal if he’s convicted of falsifying business records(he has pleaded not guilty)."
Read his full op-ed here.