Highly doubtful... Trump attorney wanted to put ex head of the FEC on the stand to prove that there was no 'campaign finance violation'; Merchan said 'No.'
Widespread legal opinion is that the defense should just let the case rest and go to the jury. Judge Merchan must put his ethics on the line when he instructs the jury prior to deliberation. Since no criminal activity has been proven so far in the trial - and the attempt to besmirch Trump's reputation and to keep him off of the campaign trail has been somewhat accomplished - some legal beagles think Merchan might dismiss the case❗
That avoids the appeal courts and investigations into misbehavior by the bench. Who knows? 🤷
” Since no criminal activity has been proven so far in the trial - and the attempt to besmirch Trump’s reputation and to keep him off of the campaign trail has been somewhat accomplished - some legal beagles think Merchan might dismiss the case❗
That avoids the appeal courts and investigations into misbehavior by the bench. Who knows? 🤷”
_________________________________________________________________
This has been a discussion I’ve had with Mr G. Merchan has allowed all kinds of “evidence” that has nothing to do with any “crime” but is only designed to humiliate President Trump. If Merchan dismisses on a “technicality” then the left can crow about how DJT wasn’t found “innocent” and Merchan avoids the rebuke of a reversal. It also makes it murkier for Trump to respond. A “where do I go to get my reputation back?” scenario.
I think the timing of the June debate by Biden is aligned with the hope that Trump is in jail and cannot participate.