Trump

[B-Man]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Nanker]

 

 

[Ann]

Why'd she wait so long? (He was "randomly" assigned three "Trump" cases? )
 

 

 

I just filed an official misconduct complaint with the New York State Unified Court System related to the “random” assignment of Acting Manhattan Justice Juan Merchan, a Biden donor whose daughter is fundraising millions off his unprecedented work, to criminal cases against President Donald J. Trump, his companies, and his allies.

Read my full judicial complaint below.

</snip>

 

Members of the Commission, and Madam Inspector General,

 

I am writing to alert you to potential misconduct by Justices and employees of the Supreme Court, Criminal Term, New York County.

 

The potential misconduct pertains to the repeated assignment of Acting Justice Juan Merchan, a Democrat Party donor, to criminal cases related to President Donald J. Trump and his allies. Acting Justice Merchan currently presides over the criminal case against President Trump brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Acting Justice Merchan also presided over the criminal trial against the Trump Organization and will be presiding over the criminal trial of Steve Bannon, a senior advisor in President Trump’s White House and a prominent advocate for President Trump.

 

1 The website for the Supreme Court, Criminal Term, New York County does not provide a comprehensive list of every justice and acting justice sitting in the courthouse, but based on the courtroom directory there are at least 24 sitting justices on the court.

 

2 Acting Justice Merchan is not even listed among them, one assumes, because of his status as an acting justice. Section 200.11(c) of the Uniform Rules for New York State Trial Courts requires that criminal actions be assigned to a judge “pursuant to a method of random selection authorized by the Chief Administrator.”

 

If justices were indeed being randomly assigned in the Criminal Term, the probability of two specific criminal cases being assigned to the same justice is quite low, and the probability of three specific criminal cases being assigned to the same justice is infinitesimally small. And yet, we see Acting Justice Merchan on all three cases.

 

This is the same Acting Justice Merchan who, in violation of New York State Code of Judicial Conduct 100.5(h), donated to President Biden’s 2020 campaign, along with the Progressive Turnout Project and its “Stop Republicans” subsidiary.

 

3 It’s also the same Acting Justice whose daughter is a political consultant working for prominent Democrats, whose firm stands to profit greatly if Donald Trump is convicted.

 

4 One cannot help but suspect that the “random selection” at work in the assignment of Acting Justice Merchan, a Democrat Party donor, to these cases involving prominent Republicans, is in fact not random at all.

 

The simple answer to why Acting Justice Merchan has been assigned to these cases would seem to be that whoever made the assignment intentionally selected Acting Justice Merchan to handle them to increase the chance that Donald Trump, the Trump Organization, and Steven Bannon would ultimately be convicted.

 

I request that both the Commission and the Inspector General investigate this anomaly to determine whether the required random selection process was in fact followed in the assignment of these criminal cases to Acting Justice Merchan.

 

If Acting Justice Merchan or any other Justices of the Court are found to have violated these rules, I would hope that the Commission would subject them to the required discipline. And if any non-judicial employees of the Court are involved in such a scheme, I would hope that the Inspector General subject them to the appropriate sanction.

 

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

 

Sincerely, Elise M. Stefanik

 

 

 1 Graham Kates, Steve Bannon facing same judge who presided over Trump Organization trial, CBS News (Decembrer 16, 2022), available at https://cbsnews.com/news/steve-bannon-trump-… organization-trial-judge-juan-merchan/ (last visited 5/28/2024).

2 Courtroom Directory, Supreme Court Criminal Term, New York County, available at https://ww2.nycourts.gov/courts/1jd/criminal/courtrooms.shtml… (last visited 5/28/2024)

3 Jeremy Herb, Kara Scannell and Lauren del Valle, $35 political contribution raises fresh scrutiny of Judge Merchan, April 6, 2023, available at https://cnn.com/2023/04/06/politics/judge-merchan-… trump-biden-contribution/index.html (last visited 5/28/2024).

4 Jon Levine and Rich Calder, Dem clients of daughter of NY judge in Trump hush-money trial raised $93M off the case, New York Post (March 30, 2024), available at https://nypost.com/2024/03/30/us-news/dem-… clients-of-daughter-of-judge-in-trump-trial-raised-90m-off-case/ (last visited 5/28/2024)

[Cinga]

15 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Totally redefines the term unanimous into something only a woke mob would think of today. Let's just ignore the fact that in order to have 4 in favor of conviction you would then have twice that number, 8 in favor of wither innocence or non-committal

 

Common core math????????

[Ann]

22 hours ago, Boyst said:

i'm still as confused as ever. i'm reading live updates on the closing the trial ... the biggest point so far making sense for a crime is that there was campaign contributions being inappropriately used but that's not a state issue and not the issue at the front of this case... at least i don't think so.

 

 i really want to buy into there being something there that the state was looking at but i don't get it.

I read this on another political site:
 

The specified misdemeanors are quite actually not applicable due to statute of limitations so they were bootstrapped via fictitious NY state statute (which requires the act(s) to have affected state elections and not federal) or federal FECA violations which NY state cannot prosecute period as FEC has jurisdiction, not NY state.
 

Taxes were paid via Cohen and his income tax so it was not tax fraud either.

[Boyst]

37 minutes ago, Ann said:

I read this on another political site:
 

The specified misdemeanors are quite actually not applicable due to statute of limitations so they were bootstrapped via fictitious NY state statute (which requires the act(s) to have affected state elections and not federal) or federal FECA violations which NY state cannot prosecute period as FEC has jurisdiction, not NY state.
 

Taxes were paid via Cohen and his income tax so it was not tax fraud either.

that's what i understand. it is a two level situation if it is anything. a federal elections violation and a tax violation.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

58 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

&#%$ing what?????  This is obscene.  Split the jury in thirds, and have each third determine a verdict with consideration of a separate crime that the defendant isn't charged with, to prove the crime he IS charged with, so that - if I'm reading this right - only a third the jury needs to vote "guilty?"

 

Whatever the verdict is, there's more than enough grounds for overturning it on appeal, with prejudice.  Which, again, just demonstrates that this is not an exercise in justice, it's just to keep Trump out of office.

[Cinga]

20 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

&#%$ing what?????  This is obscene.  Split the jury in thirds, and have each third determine a verdict with consideration of a separate crime that the defendant isn't charged with, to prove the crime he IS charged with, so that - if I'm reading this right - only a third the jury needs to vote "guilty?"

 

Whatever the verdict is, there's more than enough grounds for overturning it on appeal, with prejudice.  Which, again, just demonstrates that this is not an exercise in justice, it's just to keep Trump out of office.

 

And to have it overturned will take time, so in the meantime Demonrats will be asking people if they really want someone convicted of multiple felonies to serve as President. In that they will dance in the streets that their mission was temporarily accomplished

[Boyst]

19 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

&#%$ing what?????  This is obscene.  Split the jury in thirds, and have each third determine a verdict with consideration of a separate crime that the defendant isn't charged with, to prove the crime he IS charged with, so that - if I'm reading this right - only a third the jury needs to vote "guilty?"

 

Whatever the verdict is, there's more than enough grounds for overturning it on appeal, with prejudice.  Which, again, just demonstrates that this is not an exercise in justice, it's just to keep Trump out of office.

1)      Trump convicted

a.      Process to remove from ballot

2)      Trump conviction overturned

a.      Immediate appeal to protect democracy

b.      Process to remove from ballot pending completion of appeal

c.      Suspension of election discussed to protect democracy as an “olive branch” for the uniparty

3)      Trump conviction fast tracked first appeal

…in no feasible mind is it likely that it will not be overturned…so:

Trump wins:

Immediate rejection of his presidency officially, supreme court integrity questioning stacks the doubt on their bias because a flag was upside down and there are not enough justices to reflect the amount of people in this country…

 

Trump loses:

Appeal stands but other charges brought for declaring election was fake, rigged, bogus… Trump forever silenced. All charges are appealed successfully by design to cast doubt on SCOTUS.

 

This is all about SCOTUS at this point. That’s the long term play. To get 2-3-4 more justices.

 

Long term Trump might just delay their plan 4 years.

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

45 minutes ago, Cinga said:

 

And to have it overturned will take time, so in the meantime Demonrats will be asking people if they really want someone convicted of multiple felonies to serve as President. In that they will dance in the streets that their mission was temporarily accomplished

 

Permanently accomplished.  The mission is to keep Trump out of the White House.  As long as they can keep him a felon past November, they accomplish their plan.  

[Cinga]

38 minutes ago, Boyst said:

1)      Trump convicted

a.      Process to remove from ballot

2)      Trump conviction overturned

a.      Immediate appeal to protect democracy

b.      Process to remove from ballot pending completion of appeal

c.      Suspension of election discussed to protect democracy as an “olive branch” for the uniparty

3)      Trump conviction fast tracked first appeal

…in no feasible mind is it likely that it will not be overturned…so:

Trump wins:

Immediate rejection of his presidency officially, supreme court integrity questioning stacks the doubt on their bias because a flag was upside down and there are not enough justices to reflect the amount of people in this country…

 

Trump loses:

Appeal stands but other charges brought for declaring election was fake, rigged, bogus… Trump forever silenced. All charges are appealed successfully by design to cast doubt on SCOTUS.

 

This is all about SCOTUS at this point. That’s the long term play. To get 2-3-4 more justices.

 

Long term Trump might just delay their plan 4 years.

 

 

You missed one possibility.... Trump is found guilty but wins election is a landslide. The Democrat Party declares with the help of the Uni-Party the Justice system and election system irreparably broken and declare themselves the only legitimate party, banning the Republican Party and declaring all it's members insurrectionists and ineligible to participate in government on any level. Non-Compliance elevates you to felony fugitive status

 

Of course all of this has been dome to save our Democracy

[Cinga]

1 minute ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

Permanently accomplished.  The mission is to keep Trump out of the White House.  As long as they can keep him a felon past November, they accomplish their plan.  

 

No they don't, there is no legal authority to remove a felon from the ballot

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

44 minutes ago, Boyst said:

1)      Trump convicted

a.      Process to remove from ballot

2)      Trump conviction overturned

a.      Immediate appeal to protect democracy

b.      Process to remove from ballot pending completion of appeal

c.      Suspension of election discussed to protect democracy as an “olive branch” for the uniparty

3)      Trump conviction fast tracked first appeal

…in no feasible mind is it likely that it will not be overturned…so:

Trump wins:

Immediate rejection of his presidency officially, supreme court integrity questioning stacks the doubt on their bias because a flag was upside down and there are not enough justices to reflect the amount of people in this country…

 

Trump loses:

Appeal stands but other charges brought for declaring election was fake, rigged, bogus… Trump forever silenced.

 

 

And the Republican Party ultimately banned under federal RICO statutes, following the same misapplication of RICO as in Georgia.  

 

Really...if you can RICO two dozen people for a pattern of "criminal activity" of disputing election results, the dispute itself defining the racketeering that criminalizes the dispute...then you can RICO the entire party as a corrupt organization.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

2 minutes ago, Cinga said:

 

No they don't, there is no legal authority to remove a felon from the ballot

 

Yes, there is, on a state-by-state basis.  Felons are not permitted on the ballot in Virginia.  I've never looked at other states...but while I can't imagine all states have that law, I'm equally sure Virginia isn't the only state that does.  

 

Where it's been overturned by state courts so far, it's been overturned on the principle that you can't remove someone (Trump) from a ballot on the presumption of guilt for a crime they either haven't been accused of or haven't been convicted of.  

[Ann]

10 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

Yes, there is, on a state-by-state basis.  Felons are not permitted on the ballot in Virginia.  I've never looked at other states...but while I can't imagine all states have that law, I'm equally sure Virginia isn't the only state that does.  

 

Where it's been overturned by state courts so far, it's been overturned on the principle that you can't remove someone (Trump) from a ballot on the presumption of guilt for a crime they either haven't been accused of or haven't been convicted of.  

 

Here is the problem for VA... they can do that at the state level but nowhere in the Constitution does it restrict a felon from running for , or winning the presidency. Like in Colorado, a state cannot decide who is eligible to run for president. 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

5 minutes ago, Ann said:

 

Here is the problem for VA... they can do that at the state level but nowhere in the Constitution does it restrict a felon from running for , or winning the presidency. Like in Colorado, a state cannot decide who is eligible to run for president. 

 

True, and there's nothing from stopping people from writing someone in.

 

But while the Constitution determines who is eligible for the presidency, election procedure is determined by state law, so states CAN legally prevent a candidate from being on the ballot.  (They're hard to find - I found a NYT article that claims 28 states had laws on the books by 2008 that prevented felons from being listed on the ballot, but I can't find which 28 states they are.)

 

Colorado case was different, since Colorado was trying to apply federal law (the 14th amendment) to the state ballot.  Court basically found that the Colorado AG couldn't enforce federal law.  https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf, page 13.  "For the reasons given, responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States."  But that doesn't prevent the states from passing their own legislation.  

[Boyst]

25 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

Yes, there is, on a state-by-state basis.  Felons are not permitted on the ballot in Virginia.  I've never looked at other states...but while I can't imagine all states have that law, I'm equally sure Virginia isn't the only state that does.  

 

Where it's been overturned by state courts so far, it's been overturned on the principle that you can't remove someone (Trump) from a ballot on the presumption of guilt for a crime they either haven't been accused of or haven't been convicted of.  

oh come, i bet when the courts would hear the debate they'd 100% be willing to rush a judgement that the democrats would 100% respect the states rights to assign their own election laws because each state is responsible for it's own rights not the federal government... therefore, each state would choose, of course, to kick Trump off the ballot.

 

You know, this states rights thing sounds awful familiar...

[Boyst]

5 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

True, and there's nothing from stopping people from writing someone in.

 

But while the Constitution determines who is eligible for the presidency, election procedure is determined by state law, so states CAN legally prevent a candidate from being on the ballot.  (They're hard to find - I found a NYT article that claims 28 states had laws on the books by 2008 that prevented felons from being listed on the ballot, but I can't find which 28 states they are.)

 

Colorado case was different, since Colorado was trying to apply federal law (the 14th amendment) to the state ballot.  Court basically found that the Colorado AG couldn't enforce federal law.  https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf, page 13.  "For the reasons given, responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States."  But that doesn't prevent the states from passing their own legislation.  

which, at the end to fully wipe out the Republican party begins with tearing apart the integrity of SCOTUS.

 

they will do this by either adding more justices, or just putting out so much legal warfare that no one can keep up so by the time SCOTUS can act it is too late and when they do it will come off as a rash decision.

 

the best thing the GOP can be doing right now is getting every single lawyer in the world on retainer and getting them writing up every form possible to monitor the election and then prepare for the backlash.

 

the GOP will be gone by 2030.

[Boyst]

36 minutes ago, Cinga said:

 

You missed one possibility.... Trump is found guilty but wins election is a landslide. The Democrat Party declares with the help of the Uni-Party the Justice system and election system irreparably broken and declare themselves the only legitimate party, banning the Republican Party and declaring all it's members insurrectionists and ineligible to participate in government on any level. Non-Compliance elevates you to felony fugitive status

 

Of course all of this has been dome to save our Democracy

my favorite part about this is people thinking that the military would not take up arms against their own citizens as part of the NG. 

 

they 100% would. the MP's and such are so broken down in training they'd march maneuvers over their mother with a simple command without any intellectual thought. not to mention, so many of the military is foreign born, foreign interested, and misaligned with the true values of our American culture.

 

it'd be an insanely brutal war with China and Russia smiling with their stronger than ever alliance ready to either destroy us economically and enslave us to their policies or just invade us strategically with political beliefs, etc. as they have been doing for decades.