Posted on 06/09/2024 1:43:29 PM PDT by george76
The house always wins. That’s what matters—fairness, impartiality, the very idea of a non-partisan application of the law be damned. Welcome to the end of the republic.
I think that it was the great Miranda Devine, she of the “laptop from hell” fame, who first called the world’s attention to the latest wrinkle in the long-running “Get Trump” extravaganza in New York. Anyway, I first heard about it from her post on X Friday. “If this is legit,” she wrote, commenting on a letter purportedly from Acting Justice Juan Merchan to Donald Trump’s Counsel and the Manhattan DA’s office, “it should wipe out Trump’s conviction.”
Eh, what?
At issue was someone who (again, purportedly) posted on the Court’s public Facebook page a message from one “Michael Anderson,” a self-described “professional shitposter,” who claimed to have inside information that Trump was about to be convicted. “My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted. Thank you folks for all your hard work!” The comment, Merchan wrote, was posted on May 29, a day before Trump’s guilty verdict rolled off the tongues of Merchan’s jury.
For a brief moment, the internet was ablaze with speculative comment, elated or anguished depending on the ideological coloration of the poster. If it turned out that a juror had disobeyed his orders and spilled the beans about the verdict to someone who then posted the bulletin on Facebook, would that constitute grounds for a mistrial? After all, “prejudice to the defendant” is one of the stipulated grounds for a mistrial. CPL § 280.10 of the statute says, in part, that “the court must declare a mistrial” “upon motion of the defendant, when there occurs during the trial an error or legal defect in the proceedings, or conduct inside or outside the courtroom, which is prejudicial to the defendant and deprives him of a fair trial.”
Is that what we have here? It’s hard to say. The original Facebook post was removed. As far as I know, the juror in question has not been identified—and that’s assuming that a juror did inform “Michael Anderson” of the verdict. Did the post result in “substantial and irreparable prejudice to the defendant’s case?”
And leaving that question to one side, who would it be who would declare the mistrial even if such prejudice were irrefragable? Why, the judge, Juan M. Merchan, Acting Justice, New York Supreme Court, that’s who. Has there ever, outside the annals of Tammany Hall, been in American history a more conflicted jurist than Merchan? He is certainly up towards the top of that rogues’ gallery.
If you’re a judge, you are forbidden from making political contributions. But Merchan, who was “randomly selected” to preside over three Trump-related cases, has made contributions to several Democrat causes and politicians, including Joe Biden. The contributions are all small. But as Andy McCarthy pointed out, you don’t make small-dollar contributions to affect an election. You do it to show that “you’re on the team.”
If you are a judge, you are supposed to take special care to avoid conflicts of interest and even the “appearance of impropriety.” But Merchan’s daughter Loren, president of the Chicago-based progressive consulting firm “Authentic Campaigns,” has raised millions for such Democratic figures as Adam Schiff, who took the lead in bringing articles of impeachment against Donald Trump. Rep. Elise Stefanik brought an ethics complaint against Merchan but that, predictably, has gone exactly nowhere.
Why do I say “predictably?” Because in Democratic redoubts such as New York and Washington, D.C., the fix is always in. They are, as a friend pointed out to me, run like casinos. In the long run, the house always wins. The whole-of-government judicial assault against Donald Trump has abrogated several of his Constitutional rights, not least those outlined in the Sixth Amendment. “In all criminal proceedings,” that brief Amendment reads, in part, “the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State . . . and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.” But Judge Merchan declined to tell Trump (or the jury) exactly what crime he was accused of and forbade his counsel from bringing several favorable witnesses to testify.
The travesty that was New York v. Trump has been subject to reams of expert analysis and microscopic dissection, as much by public-spirited anti-Trump commentators as by those on the pro-Trump side of the docket.
Judge Merchan will simply skate over this embarrassing Facebook post, just as he skated over the rights of the defendant, Donald J. Trump. The house always wins in the end. Applied to the rule of law, that means that the regime party’s interests always take precedence over the rule of law.
Rather, the “rule of law,” just as Lenin taught us, is simply whatever the party demands. For the dedicated communist (or Democrat progressive), the very idea of “impartiality” is a bourgeois construct, a MAGA (or ultra-MAGA) fiction, and therefore eminently dispensable. Juan Merchan and his alter-ego District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, have just earned themselves a footnote in the dismal annals of legal depravity. Do not, however, expect any smidgeon of remorse to trouble their consciences. Those presiding over the house accounts do not have time for such sentimentalities. Ideological conformity and the power and perquisites such conformity brings are their heart’s desires, their existential cynosures.
The house always wins. That’s what matters—fairness, impartiality, and the very idea of a non-partisan application of the law be damned.
Welcome to the end of the republic.
Good questions. Something fishy is going on for sure.
Anybody can post anything ( true or false ) in any social media platform. I wouldn’t put too much hope in this. 😞
Juan Merchan is completely in charge. He is the sole arbiter of whether this has any impact.
He’s not going to tear down his own perfect trial and verdict.
Merchan could’ve thrown the case out on a solid basis 76 times, but he was going to get Trump. He donated to a Stop Trump Org. His daughter collected over $100 Million
Of course he goes forward to Convict and Sentence.
“”Source? Not to the fact he calls himself a “professional s-t poster” but to the fact he fessed up that this post was a prank.””
Yes....source! Who? Where? When?
He posted it.
The court informed Merchan that it had been posted, which it had.
Good point.
1) retrial of Trump right away with more bad propaganda for the view to gloat over.
2) The illegals often have court dates up to 7 years later with their promise to show up then. Quickly released for full freedom at our expense.
I don’t understand the arguments.
Merchan could’ve thrown out the case and declared a mistrial any time he wanted. It is Merchan that decides all of this. He could move back sentencing (delaying Appeal) by his own whim.
The Trial and Guilty Verdict are the achievement of his life, and he’s wildly popular in his district because of it. He’s not trying to get out of anything.
He’s untouchable, and if this is overturned, it’ll be long too late. The two courts in NY will run out the clock.
There are two levels of appeal in Dirty NY.
Where? When? Source?
“”He posted it.””
WHO posted WHAT?
He posted it.
*****************************
Just to be sure, you’re saying he posted that it was a prank?
Where? When? Source?
Sex who?
It won’t matter if his daughter posted it, or a daughter of a Juror.
It’s wholly Merchan’s decision. He’s ignored every aspect of the Law 56 times, why would he now decide he needs to follow it strictly?
He’s not going to suddenly feel compelled to follow the law. And he has already had Trump where he wants him because NY will sit on the Appeals.
How did he get selected for this Trial? It’s bigger than Merchan. NY changed the Statute of Limitations to get Trump. The number 3 in the DOJ came in to prosecute him.
NY runs out the clock, full stop.
Sex me.
I know there is so much speculation, and I am simply adding to it. Sorry but here goes.
First, it is true that the higher court made Merchan aware of the post. So, this was not him being impartial and “doing the right thing”. I believe he was required to send the letter.
Secondly, even though he put quote marks around the statement, he did not “quote” it. There was a phrase about “MAGA crazies” in the original quote. Why did he modify the quote? Because the original quote shows that the poster is clearly anti-Trump and by extension so is the juror who talked out of line. Also, a poster further down chided “Michael Anderson” for getting his cousin in trouble.
Third, I don’t believe the upper court would have been concerned if they looked into it and found it was a prank. It’s been on their website for a week, they had time to verify its authenticity.
Because of NY state law concerning juries conversing outside the courtroom pre-verdict, I believe the court and Merchan think this post is a real problem for them.
Nice deconstruction.
He didn’t think any of the other Laws he violated were a problem for him?
He’s Merchan and he’s untouchable in NY, and wildly popular.
He’s not touching his Masterpiece nor alienating his Daughter’s clients.
In our system, a judge is not allowed to do their own investigation, and then make rulings on what they find out. There is an exception for matters that affect the integrity of the trial, if the judge does the investigation from the bench, in open court.
If this post had come to light during the trial, it would have been proper for the judge to have called in jurors one at a time, and asked about any relationship with the poster. The judge could also question anyone present at the trial, or outside in the hallway, where the bailiff can summon them inside.
But the judge who ventures off the bench to conduct investigations, and comes back to announce what facts were found, is committing reversible error. (Not that that has stopped him before.)
Trumps attorney and the judges office said its real.
Agree that they think it’s a problem. It’s real and it’s going to leave a mark.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.