December 17, 2024
Dem Judge Refuses to Toss Trump Conviction
Timothy Birdnow
Proof tthis was always about politics and not about justice or the law.
Breaking — Judge Merchan refuses to throw out Trump conviction based on ‘presidential immunity.’
Merchan keeps foot-dragging, knowing full well Trump would win on appeal. He doesn't want to appeal; he wants Trump stuck in limbo, with this hanging over him. He hopes that the political climate will become more favorable in a few years then he can throw the book at Trump as soon as he leaves office. Oh, and they can continue to call him a convicted felon.
So Trump has to keep wasting time and money on this thing while Merchan wastes taxpayer dollars. It's not costing Him anything!
I hope there are private investigators looking into this judge's own affairs. He needs to be taken to the woodshed one way or another.
Merchan knows full well this was intimately intertwined with Trump's duties as President of the United States and that he has no authority over this matter any longer. (Who would doubt that the "hush money" aka NdE was about protecting the dignity of the office of the President?) He also knows that Alvin Bragg created several new legal theories to turn what was at most a misdemeanor and a FEDERAL crime into a state violation. But Merchan refuses to drop this despite the fact he's undoubtedly facing a major spanking when this gets to a higher court. That is at least part of the reason he won't let it go to a higher court; he wants control of this.
In a sane state this man would be removed from office. We need to find proof of collusion with the Democrats, or corruption from him (something I'm sure is there - almost every Democrat has some dirt under their fingernails).
To quote Tony Montana in Scarface "if you want to play rough, say hello to my little friend!"
Proof tthis was always about politics and not about justice or the law.
Breaking — Judge Merchan refuses to throw out Trump conviction based on ‘presidential immunity.’
Merchan keeps foot-dragging, knowing full well Trump would win on appeal. He doesn't want to appeal; he wants Trump stuck in limbo, with this hanging over him. He hopes that the political climate will become more favorable in a few years then he can throw the book at Trump as soon as he leaves office. Oh, and they can continue to call him a convicted felon.
So Trump has to keep wasting time and money on this thing while Merchan wastes taxpayer dollars. It's not costing Him anything!
I hope there are private investigators looking into this judge's own affairs. He needs to be taken to the woodshed one way or another.
Merchan knows full well this was intimately intertwined with Trump's duties as President of the United States and that he has no authority over this matter any longer. (Who would doubt that the "hush money" aka NdE was about protecting the dignity of the office of the President?) He also knows that Alvin Bragg created several new legal theories to turn what was at most a misdemeanor and a FEDERAL crime into a state violation. But Merchan refuses to drop this despite the fact he's undoubtedly facing a major spanking when this gets to a higher court. That is at least part of the reason he won't let it go to a higher court; he wants control of this.
In a sane state this man would be removed from office. We need to find proof of collusion with the Democrats, or corruption from him (something I'm sure is there - almost every Democrat has some dirt under their fingernails).
To quote Tony Montana in Scarface "if you want to play rough, say hello to my little friend!"
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:39 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 325 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Merchan has no business being a judge -- if you ask me, or even if you don't.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at December 17, 2024 11:47 PM (aL7f6)
2
The refusal based on presidential immunity is entirely reasonable and proper. There are several valid reasons to throw out the convictions, but presidential immunity is not one of them.
Posted by: Bill H at December 18, 2024 12:27 AM (Q7br2)
3
The "hush money" charge and the "inflation of value on loan applications," which are the charges at issue, were all actions committed when he was not in office.
Posted by: Bill H at December 18, 2024 12:30 AM (Q7br2)
4
Well Bill that is a good point, but he still should have thrown these convicttions out. In fact he should have tossed the case via summary judgment well before it ever got going.
BUT Bill the "hush money" which was an NDA, was not a state crime so Merchan had no authority over it, and the FEC did not convict Trump of it. It allegedly happened it October of 2016. The argument can equally be made that the accusations were brought as a vehicle of election tampering.
And Merchan simply made himself the arbiter of something for which he was not qualified - appraising property. In real estate (a business I was in) the way it works is you are held to professional standards if you take on the roll. So if you tell a client a prperty is worth X you are held to the standards of an appraiser. (That's why you are never supposed to give anyone a straight answer to anything; you are open to lawsuits and losing your license.) Merchan made himself an appraiser and a loan officer without qualification. As Trump's "victims" didn't disagree with his valuation why should a state judge?
Of course these objections do not overturn your basic point, which is essentially correct.
BUT Bill the "hush money" which was an NDA, was not a state crime so Merchan had no authority over it, and the FEC did not convict Trump of it. It allegedly happened it October of 2016. The argument can equally be made that the accusations were brought as a vehicle of election tampering.
And Merchan simply made himself the arbiter of something for which he was not qualified - appraising property. In real estate (a business I was in) the way it works is you are held to professional standards if you take on the roll. So if you tell a client a prperty is worth X you are held to the standards of an appraiser. (That's why you are never supposed to give anyone a straight answer to anything; you are open to lawsuits and losing your license.) Merchan made himself an appraiser and a loan officer without qualification. As Trump's "victims" didn't disagree with his valuation why should a state judge?
Of course these objections do not overturn your basic point, which is essentially correct.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at December 18, 2024 08:47 AM (C7GoI)
5
Bill, the basis of the felony charge (as opposed to the misdemeanor, which is what it would have been otherwise) was not the "crime" but the "coverup" and Trump's trying to keep the payment quiet after he was elected. The prosecution used e-mails and other correspondence from Trump that occurred after the election as proof he was trying to cover up "election tampering". Without that there would have been no felony; what he was accused of (and the FEC didn't charge him for) was not a felony. So the "felonious" activity that allegedly happened occurred after Trump was in office and thus falls under the Presidential immunity, or so it seems to me. That was Trump's attorney's argument too.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at December 18, 2024 09:40 AM (C7GoI)
6
The charge was election tampering, which was bogus, but even if it was the coverup and happened while he was in office, the coverup was not part of his official duties and the immunity attaches only to acts performed as part of his duties. Again, I agree the convictions should have been overturned, the charges were bogus, but "Presidential immunity" was not a valid claim.
Posted by: Bill H at December 18, 2024 09:55 AM (Q7br2)
7
You certainly have a valid point Bill.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at December 19, 2024 08:56 AM (NpDLy)
27kb generated in CPU 0.0231, elapsed 0.2317 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.2175 seconds, 192 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.2175 seconds, 192 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
