If they can do that to TRUMP, they can do that to YOU

Original Content | 6/1/2024 | By Laz A. Mataz

[Lazamataz]

(At the end of this editorial, I'm offering the opportunity to get a bumper sticker to spread this message)

A long time ago, in 2005, I saw something George W. Bush had done, and I remarked: "First we beat the Soviet Union, then we became them." Little did I know that in under twenty years, we would see Soviet-style Show Trials. We just witnessed the most high-profile Show Trial in American history, where the President (and current candidate for a second term) was put through a trial where all of the elements were crafted to ensure a guilty verdict on manufactured crimes.

Consider the following elements:

• This judge was specifically selected to handle this case. This case was judge-shopped.
• The venue was specifically selected to ensure a Trump-hating jury.
• "Judge" Merchan took over Federal jurisdiction of election law, even though this was a state court.
• Further, Trump stood accused of a crime in which he had zero personal participation. Some nameless accountant filled out the expense information offered as evidence.
• Merchan refused to allow the defense to present witnesses that could refute the prosecution claims, most notably, one of the nation's foremost experts on Federal election law)
• The New York law (falsifying records) requires a predicate crime, none of which were proven or even formally alleged.
• Merchan instructed the jury to ignore the above fact and assume that a predicate crime exists.
• Multiple federal and state prosecutors passed on even charging Trump with any of those predicate crimes.
• The state crime that Trump was accused of, falsifying business records in pursuit of any other fraud, had long passed the Statute of Limitations, and could not legally be used as a charge.
• During the entire fraudulent trial, he out a gag order on Trump to ensure Trump could not defend himself in the court of public opinion.
• Merchan allowed elements of character assassination to be entered as evidence. How, exactly, was the Access Hollywood tape pertinent to this case?
• Merchan allowed a convicted perjurer and serial liar (Michael Cohen) to be the lead prosecution witness.
• The timing of the prosecution and sentencing of this case was carefully timed to inflict maximum political damage.

In short, a "hanging judge" was selected in a politically-hostile jurisdiction, wherein which the judge defied nearly every rule of evidence and law, muzzled the defense, and promoted every prosecution request, no matter how outrageous.

This harkens back to the Soviet Show Trial era that Josef Stalin used to eliminate his opponents. Joe Biden personally showed that this fake trial was politically motivated by flashing a demonic grin when he was asked about the verdict, as he shuffled away from reporters.... and he sent a Trump-hating actor (Robert DiNero) to the courthouse to further assassinate Trump's character.

The so-called judge in this case, Juan Merchan, Merchan violated President Trump's Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights in so many ways.

• Trump's Sixth Amendment right to "an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed" was denied to him by Bragg and Merchan by not moving the venue to a more balanced location outside of New York City.
• Trump's Sixth Amendment right to a trial in "which district shall have been previously ascertained by law" was denied to him by Bragg and Merchan by trying a federal campaign finance law in a county court in New York.
• Trump's Sixth Amendment right "to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations" against him was denied to him by Bragg and Merchan by not revealing what the underlying charge that bootstrapped the misdemeanors was. Even after conviction, nobody knows what the underlying crime was.
• Trump's Sixth Amendment right to "have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor" was denied to him by Bragg and Merchan by not letting Trump put the former Chairman of the Federal Elections Commission on the witness stand to give expert testimony on what constitutes illegal campaign spending.
• Trump's Sixth Amendment right to have a unanimous jury verdict was denied to him by Bragg and Merchan by letting the jury pick from several possible underlying crimes without all agreeing on what that crime was.
• Trump's Fifth Amendment right to "due process of law" was violated when Bragg and Merchan instructed the jury to presume guilt of the underlying crime that resuscitated misdemeanors that were past their statute of limitations.

To point out the motivations of this so-called judge (besides, of course, Trump Derangement Syndrome), it was revealed that Merchan's daughter (a Democrat consultant) is poised to receive $125 Million in fees, and was given unlimited access to his court.

If such a political, Soviet-style Show Trial can happen to a former President who also is a billionaire, is most certainly can happen to you.

[joesbucks]

Actually I read they weren’t asked. So any claim of being all democrats or anti-Trump aren’t based in fact. And there was one individual that claimed to get most of their news from Truth Social. That would be an anomaly for a liberal. For that matter to even know about it.

[UCANSEE2]

T-shirt slogan.

“This NOVEMBER, I’m giving President Trump 34 votes.”

[CivilWarBrewing]

GREAT article and thank you for your hard work!

Now, onto my critique..

NO MENTION OF COLANGELO and the fact he was SENT BY THE WH/DOJ TO SERVE AS LEAD PROSECUTOR ON THIS CASE?

[mware]

...and that is why Trump is going to get 35% of young black male voters. They know what happen to Trump during the trial.

[Lazamataz]

In general I still think yes. But I haven’t had time to totally digest what was shared.

The point of posting material on this forum is for people to read it.

If you won't digest my material, but come here and still assert it was a fair trial, then you are being willfully ignorant... as a rabid liberal tends to do.

I have a lawyer friend who does not participate in this forum. He reviewed my work, and told me that except for one assertion, I was right on point. He told me I should be an attorney.

I almost became one.

[Political Junkie Too]

I don't mind at all.

The more people who see it, the better off we are.

---

J'Accuse...!

Before this is over, President Trump will become America's Alfred Dreyfus and take down the entire deep Democrat state that is persecuting this man just to hold onto their corruption of power.

-PJ

[Lazamataz]

Actually I read they weren’t asked. So any claim of being all democrats or anti-Trump aren’t based in fact.

That is correct.

However, time will unfold the truth. They will not be able to help themselves. They will speak.

[CivilWarBrewing]

IF THE RATS JUDGE-SHOPPED, THEN I GUARANTEE YOU THEY JURY-SHOPPED TOO.

'RANDOM', MY ARSE.

This ENTIRE SHOW TRIAL was RIGGED, just like our FAKE news media, our FAKE elections, and our FAKE president.

Joe Burden is KNOWINGLY ALLOWING MILLIONS OF ILLEGALS INCLUDING TERRORISTS to cross our border, yet TRUMP gets prosecuted for a NEBULOUS BOOK KEEPING ENTRY concerning a prostitute?

[Lazamataz]

...and that is why Trump is going to get 35% of young black male voters. They know what happen to Trump during the trial.

If Trump is re-elected, he should be declared as an honorary black President... the second one.

[Lazamataz]

GREAT article and thank you for your hard work!

Thanks!

Now, onto my critique.. NO MENTION OF COLANGELO and the fact he was SENT BY THE WH/DOJ TO SERVE AS LEAD PROSECUTOR ON THIS CASE?

You know, I was going to say "I don't think that is necessarily a valid point", but on reflection, I don't recall much DOJ participation in a state trial... so maybe this is a valid point after all.

[mware]

I have seen YouTube videos made by black men and women who are claiming he is the first black president.

[detective]

Please consider this as another slogan.

If you still don’t understand why there are so few honest, intelligent people in the government, look what they did to President Trump

[red-dawg]

[joesbucks]

At least some will. But for the 100% liberal jury, it’s like so much else. An accusation not backed by evidence.

I still stand by Trump hurt himself by not testifying. Had he charmed and directly answered questions, he likely would have done himself a favor. But alas, after a lot of blustering, he didn’t.

[SuperLuminal]

First they (the communists who now rule us) helped with the chicom virus sneak attack...

Second, in plain sight, they stole a presidential election...

Third, they railroaded and imprisoned the J6 protesters...

Fourth, all the U.S. borders were flung open for the worls;s vermin to flood the nation...

Fifth, The American serfs did absolutely nothing about any of the above...

No specious warning has worked in the past, and it is too late to do anything at this late date...
Americans believe that it is best to not rattle their chains and draw undue attention...

[Lizavetta]

About once every three years or so we'll get a MurryMom reference on here and I actually start laughing out loud. Her and old A+Bert were priceless.

Oh, yeah. Whatever happened to them?

[Verginius Rufus]

Yes, Trump will triple his percentage of the black male vote, but that will be counterbalanced by Biden’s tripling of his percentage of the black female vote, to 270%.

[Eagle Forgotten]

Gaffer, I agree with your conclusion — the case cited by joesbucks won’t affect Trump’s appeal — but I do so for a different reason.

SCOTUS had already established that a verdict of Guilty in a criminal case must be rendered by a unanimous jury. The issue in the new case was retroactivity: Where there were people sitting in prison because of non-unanimous jury verdicts that had preceded the SCOTUS decision, were they entitled to a new trial? A divided Court held that they were not.

This will affect Trump only if, between now and any later appellate decision, there’s a similar CHANGE in the law. Something that was permissible in May 2024 becomes impermissible.

I haven’t heard of any prospect of that happening. In the OP by Lazamataz, he makes arguments based on existing law. Those arguments will stand or fall without regard to the question of retroactivity.

[Verginius Rufus]

The 12 jurors were mad at Trump for defeating Hillary in 2016 and wanted their revenge. He couldn’t have charmed them, and if he had testified Bragg would have discovered some inaccuracy, however trivial, to charge him with perjury. Trump wanted to testify but his lawyers were able to talk him out of it.

[353FMG]

I think most Americans understand it but do not realize how it will affect their lives.