I think Merchan erred (one of many) in not allowing former Commissioner Smith's testimony.
It was an intentional “error”.
The judge and DA committed crimes. Who will go after them?
Is there such a thing as breaking the campaign finance laws of New York?
Agree. The existence of a predicate crime is either a question of law or fact. If a question of law, it should not have gone to a jury until all elements of the predicate crime have been elements. But a NY judge has no competence to tell when a federal crime has been committed. And the judge refused to allow the expert witness that the defense offered. Then, is the predicate crime a question of fact? Only if some other tribunal has held that Trump committed the crime. And we all know that the FEC passed on that prosecution.
bttt
Great read!
Bookmark.
I will never go to NYC. However it is dangerous there because of liberal crime. I wonder if those involved in prosecuting Trump will be victims of violence that ends their miserable lives? It seems in NYC you can rape a woman and get a court date over a year from now. You can kill a person and be let loose on bond/bail back out on the steet overnight.
Remember the tasteless old jokes about running over pedestrians in cross walk and getting bonus points to help with points on your license, how the pregnant ones get you extra points.... Maybe the people who go after the Judge and Bragg if successful become modern day Crime Heros.
I know I’ll a buy the person a drink, or two depending on what he accomplishes;)
It was not a court of law. It was a court of lawfare.
Smith clarifies many aspects. A few linger:
1. If you make a legal payment from personal funds, do you even need to record what is? Can you record it anything you want?
2. Per Chevron deference, the FEC is the authority over what is campaign violation? And not a court?
Bookmark.