Posted on 05/30/2024 10:17:08 AM PDT by Heartlander
If you’ve been following former President Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York, you might have seen the shocking news that the judge in that trial, Juan Merchan, issued bizarre and plainly unconstitutional jury instructions on Wednesday, telling jurors they need not agree on what crime Trump allegedly committed to reach a unanimous guilty verdict.
You read that right. According to Judge Merchan, the jury could come back with a guilty verdict without agreeing on whether Trump committed election fraud, tax fraud, or falsification of business records. He essentially divided the jury into three groups of four, saying that if they’re split 4-4-4 on what crime Trump committed, he’d treat that as unanimous. To say this is unusual is of course a gross understatement. As Guy Benson noted on X, it amounts to a “choose your own adventure” jury instruction.
To make sense of these instructions, however, one must first understand the insane underlying theory of the case the prosecution has attempted to make, which is no easy task. It goes something like this. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg indicted Trump on 34 counts relating to allegations that Trump instructed his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to pay “hush money” to pornographer Stormy Daniels to conceal an alleged past affair, and then falsified business records to label the payments as legal fees instead of campaign expenses.
Setting aside that it would have been a violation of federal campaign finance law to label such payments as campaign expenses, Trump’s alleged falsification of business records would only qualify as felonies if they were done in the service of some other crime that Trump intended to commit or conceal. What crime was that? The prosecutors have been vague on that point. No one can really say what crime, if any, the alleged falsification of business records was connected with.
Even now, after closing arguments, it’s not clear what underlying crime Trump was trying to conceal. During closing arguments earlier this week, Merchan allowed the prosecution to claim repeatedly that Trump committed federal campaign violations, which is not true. He then said the prosecution had referenced three possible crimes that could constitute the illegal means Trump used to influence the election: a federal election violation (which didn’t happen), a tax violation, and falsification of records. Jurors need not agree on which of these three occurred, said Merchan, but could also reach a unanimous verdict so long as the crime they all agree to was in furtherance of another crime.
But it gets worse. Merchan also barred Trump’s defense lawyers from explaining to the jury that no campaign finance violations had occurred and then allowed prosecutors (who gave their closing statement after the defense) to claim, falsely, that federal campaign finance violations had indeed occurred. The judge didn’t try to correct prosecutors or clarify any of this for jurors before sending them away to deliberate.
It’s pretty clear by now, if it wasn’t before, that this entire trial is a fishing expedition designed to convict Trump of something. Jonathan Turley called it a “manufactured criminal theory,” which it obviously is. Last April when the indictment was unsealed, my colleague Margot Cleveland wrote that Bragg had attempted to “bootstrap a federal election violation onto state law by claiming Trump falsified the business records to conceal campaign finance crimes,” and that the charges were “even more pathetic than anticipated.”
Now that the oral argument phase of the trial is over, the prosecution’s case hasn’t improved. In fact, it appears to be so weak that Merchan is discarding not just basic legal norms to get the jury to convict, but also basic reason. After all, how can a jury reach a unanimous verdict if they don’t even agree on what happened?
The only way to understand any of this is to realize that this isn’t about the law or seeing justice done for a crime. It’s about power. Denying Trump basic constitutional rights such as due process, as Merchan has done repeatedly in this case, is a way to demonstrate that Trump has no power compared to the New York Democrats who are trying to jail him before the November election. That was also the purpose of the unintentionally humorous press conference with actor Robert De Niro the Biden campaign held outside the courthouse this week.
These demonstrations of power aren’t meant merely to demoralize Trump and restrict his ability to campaign for president, they’re also meant to demoralize his millions of supporters all over the country. Trump voters are meant to understand that their man is going down and they would be smart to submit to those who actually have power: Democrats.
It’s also something more than that. It’s a threat. After all, if they can do this to Trump, just imagine what they can do to you.
If we are still a Constitutional Republic five years from now, books will be written on this trial as a prime example of soviet style tyranny in NY.
Think of this Merchan a@@clown as being like the British tax collectors— and suitably headed for the treatment they received, at a minimum, from the then American Patriots of the Revolution. He is acting like a King’s Magistrate!!! From Bogota (snort snort) Colombia. No one knows if he is even an American Citizen (not required for the common trial court of New York State- the so called “Supreme” Court which isn’t).
It was all tightly coordinated from starts to finish.
Judge and Bragg ex-parte meetings.
There is no other way. The charges were hidden to the very end.
Trump was not allowed to call witnesses in his defense
Non-unanimity allowed on the crime committed.
The Prosecutor was allowed to tell the Jury things that were not in evidence in the trial.
Judge’s daughter raised over $100 Million on daddy’s trial
Judge pointed the Jury to specific evidence rather than telling them to consider all the evidence and testimony presented at Trial.
To hide charges is to prevent the defendant from defending themself.
I have hopes for 2,4 and 8 but considering that bastards rigging he can get around them.
Law Professor Jonathan Turley writes from inside Merchan’s court:
<><>The jury has been given little substantive judicial assistance to consider,
<><>Merchan even denied the jury a legal expert’s input,
<><>that there was no federal election violation,
<><>that required dismissal for (a) lack of evidence, or, (b) lack of a recognizable crime.
And now we know why: this Judge is not going to assist
a case when his daughter. a Democrat consultant, has $125 Million in fees on the line, and is being given access to his court documents.
If you know who your representative is but you are unable to contact them using their contact form, the Clerk of the House maintains addresses and phone numbers of all House members and Committees
Or call (202) 224-3121
U.S. House switchboard
Mention state and zip to be connected.
And Merchan allowed jurors onto the Jury that said they Hated Trump.
Merchan referred to the Prosecution in court was “We.”
“But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty toward the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science. When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always-do not forget this, Winston-always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever.” - Orwell, 1984
I read somewhere that if a guilty verdict comes down, that would give states the ability to remove him from the Presidential ballot, and thereby keeping him from getting elected President. Is that true?
I want to know how we come back from this? Let bygones be bygones? Not this time.
You can never trust the Progressives and the system they operate in. Loss of trust leads to loss of Agency. We’re practically there now.
Merchan’s behavior against Trump is literally an ATTACK by the Democratic Party on slightly over half of the adult population of the US.
The Democratic Party has become MORE of an ENEMY of America’s future than the Chinese, the Russians or the Radical Islamists.
Going forward, they should be treated as such.
Gee,I wonder what the common strain is here
Colorado Trump thrown off the ballot by 4 Dem majority judges and Dem AG prosecutor
Maine Trump thrown off the ballot by Dem Election Commissioner
DC Trump indicted and to be tried for insurrection before Dem judge with Dem AG prosecutor
Georgia Trump indicted for election interference by Dem Prosecutor
NY Trump indicted for business record fraud by Dem Prosecutor Dem before Dem Asst Prosecutor Judge
NY Trump tried for mortgage loan misvaluation by Dem AG and fined 380 million by Dem Judge
Az Trump team indicted for election interference by Dem AG
NY Trump suit for sexual assault by Dem plaintiff with Dem funded lawyer before Dem judge and Dem jury awarding 86 million
NY Trump tried for slander by same Dem plaintiff, Dem judge awards 5 million
NY Trump DC/Fla Trump indicted for Documents possession by Dem Grand Jury and Dem AG
No, states have no power over federal elections and that is not one of the constitutional requirements for candidates.
That’s good to hear, thank you for that information.
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.