(Congressional Agenda) – Earlier this week, Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over the alleged falsified business records case brought against former President Donald Trump in Manhattan by District Attorney Alvin Bragg, refused — for the third time — to recuse himself from the case. You know, the one where Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts. The one held in a city where the vast majority of citizens are Democrats who hate his guts, which means the chances of him getting an impartial jury and having a fair trial are almost non-existent.
Andrew McCarthy, a Fox News contributor, noted that the reason Merchan has once again denied the request to recuse himself is because the judge is dead set on sentencing Trump to prison on September 18th. Why is this significant? Early voting in the state of Pennsylvania, one of the key battleground states in the upcoming presidential election, happens just two days later. And we’re supposed to believe none of this is politically motivated? Really?
McCarthy wrote that the defense team representing Trump has been attempting to push back sentencing, and, he points out, if the defendant were anyone else, they would have a pretty good case for doing so. However, leftists have an axe to grind against the former president and will do anything possible to take him out of play ahead of the election. Or, at the least, to make him look like a less viable voting option for conservatives.
“On July 1, the U.S. Supreme Court held that presidents (including former presidents) are (a) presumptively immune from criminal prosecution for any official acts taken as president, and (b) absolutely immune if the official acts are core constitutional duties of the chief executive. The court instructed that this immunity extends not only to charges but to evidence. That means prosecutors are not just barred from alleging official presidential acts as crimes; they are further prohibited from even using such acts as proof offered to establish other crimes,” he remarked in the op-ed. “There is no denying that Bragg’s prosecutors used some of Trump’s official acts to prove their case. Indeed, they called as witnesses two of Trump’s White House staffers.”
McCarthy added, “Unsurprisingly then, Trump’s lawyers moved post-trial to have the guilty verdicts thrown out based on the high court’s immunity ruling. Further, they again argued that Merchan should recuse himself. On that score, they claimed the lucrative political work Merchan’s daughter has done for Vice President Kamala Harris should be seen as more significant now that Harris has replaced President Biden as Trump’s Democratic opponent in the upcoming election.”
Merchan denied the recusal request on Tuesday. The judge also disclosed that he plans to be the one who issues a ruling on the immunity claim from the former president by Sept. 16th. The most important thing here though, McCarthy says, is that Merchan informed the parties to begin preparations for the court to move toward sentencing on Sept. 18th. He instructed attorneys to submit their arguments on the subject.
“If we may read the tea leaves, Merchan has already decided that he will deny Trump’s immunity motion. There is, moreover, a high likelihood that he will impose a prison sentence against Trump right after that. By the time he’d issued his letter last week, Merchan had had weeks to mull over the Supreme Court’s immunity decision and Team Trump’s subsequent brief arguing that the guilty verdicts should be tossed out. He told the parties to get ready for sentencing anyway. Obviously, if Merchan had any intention of vacating the verdicts, or of recusing himself, he would not have stuck to the sentencing date,” McCarthy’s piece said.
He went on to write, “I suspect that Merchan will rationalize that Trump (a) was not charged based on official presidential acts, and (b) would have been convicted even if Bragg’s prosecutors had not introduced arguably immunized evidence. Such a ruling might be wrong, especially on the latter point (at trial, prosecutors described some of the testimony from Trump staffers as “devastating”); but Merchan made so many outrageous rulings in the case that it would be foolish to expect him to change course now.”
McCarthy then explained that the decision from the Supreme Court concerning presidential immunity will be further supported by another late-term ruling that helps Trump’s appeal. The case is that of Erlinger v. U.S. The court in this particular case reaffirmed that in criminal cases, important proof elements that impact a potential sentence must be found unanimous by a jury.
“Merchan, to the contrary, denied Trump the right to a unanimous verdict on the supposed crime (conspiracy to influence the election by illegal conduct) that Bragg alleged Trump was trying to conceal by falsifying his business records. That crime is what turned a misdemeanor into a felony, and what allowed Bragg to get around the two-year misdemeanor statute of limitations,” McCarthy stated.
The author says the main point here is that this case against Trump was political and not about getting justice for alleged crimes committed. It’s why we have dubbed this sort of tactic “lawfare.” Prosecutors and judges involved in the prosecution of our former president aren’t actually concerned about nabbing convictions, nor do they care if those convictions they do get are tossed out during the appeal process. It’s really not even about Merchan giving Trump prison time, which he probably won’t serve, as he’ll likely get bail pending an appeal.
So what is the left hoping to accomplish?
They want the former prosecutor, who is now the Democratic presidential nominee and current vice president, Kamala Harris, to be able to label Trump “a convicted felon sentenced to prison” a few weeks out from the election. Their goal is to drum up support for her campaign during a season when early voting is already underway in battleground states like Pennsylvania.
Copyright 2024. CongressionalAgenda.com
So, Trump can run the country from jail. There’s nothing in the Constitution saying a person cannot run the country from a jail cell. I, a former democrat, am seriously fed up with the democrat party and its paid criminals of wasting my life doing criminal activity against a person who does not agree with democrats. How about getting your a** concentrating on how you are going to correct your acting like a bunch of communists. What the hell happened to the democrat party my parents voted for. All the democrats do now is pushing killing babies, 65 million after the last count and growing close to 75 million dead babies. What kind of people want its population to kill their babies. Well let’s see. Russia couldn’t feed its own new communist man so it pushed killing babies calling it abortion so the communist farms could produce enough food. Didn’t work. The commies had to turn back the community farms back to the farmers or what farmers were still alive. Then China in its “Great Leap Forward” starved 64 million of its population figuring the “no babies” would help stabilize the country’s population for feeding. This country is already past 64 million dead babies and taxpayers are forced to pay billions to planned parenthood so the baby killers can live high off the hog doing what communists do best. Kill off the lower class so the upper class can live. Sounds like what democrats want to do to this country. Be good little baby murderers so the democrats can live off the middle class which they are destroying fast.
Trump’s first act as president, should be to defund New York. Not a penny of taxpayers money for the most corrupt state in America.