Staff Reports
The legal circus surrounding President-elect Donald Trump has taken another bizarre turn as Justice Juan Merchan has postponed a ruling on motions to dismiss the questionable New York convictions against him. This procrastination looks fishy, with some speculating it might be an effort to ensnare the former president in a web of political trickery. Alvin Bragg’s prosecution has been celebrated by the left as a noble pursuit of justice, but in reality, it’s about as constitutional as a two-headed coin.
The foundation of Bragg’s case rests on shaky legal ground, claiming Trump committed a felony by allegedly falsifying business records. However, the initial indictment aimed at Trump is like a riddle without an answer. It cites a vague “intent to commit another crime,” but fails to clarify what that crime even is. This glaring omission violates the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees that defendants be fully informed of the accusations against them. If only Bragg had taken a constitutional law course, he might have learned that ambiguity isn’t a legal strategy, but rather a recipe for confusion.
Juan Merchan Delays Ruling on Trump Prosecution, Either Backing Down or Setting Trap
They just can't let it go…it's killing them inside. smhhttps://t.co/JRWZjOK3WC
— 🅿️®️🚫❌✌🏾 (@proxcee) November 14, 2024
Once the trial finally convened, prosecutors tried to elevate the saga by introducing a secondary crime related to the New York law governing electioneering practices, all while keeping the specifics hidden from the jury. And as if that wasn’t convoluted enough, they hinted at a potential “third crime” involving alleged violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act. But here’s the kicker: NDAs – the very foundation of the accusation against Trump – are not actually considered illegal campaign expenses under federal law. Apparently, Bragg missed the memo that the Department of Justice and the Federal Elections Commission are the only entities empowered to interpret these laws. Guess the Supremacy Clause doesn’t apply in Bragg’s world.
Justice Merchan only added to the chaos by excluding key testimony from the former Federal Election Commission chairman, who could have shattered Bragg’s frivolous claims about NDAs. Instead of allowing this critical insight into the courtroom, Merchan’s actions set the stage for a trial that many expect will end in a marked constitutional rejection on appeal. Adding insult to injury, Merchan is a partisan player with a financial history of backing Democratic candidates, which presents a clear conflict of interest when presiding over this highly charged political prosecution. In a normal world, judges are expected to be impartial, not a fundraising arm for the opposition.
The most egregious constitutional violation is Merchan’s “choose-your-own-adventure” jury instruction. The Sixth Amendment stipulates that juries must unanimously agree on the crime a defendant is charged with, yet Merchan allowed jurors to pick and choose their favorite supposed offense. This type of legal legerdemain has more in common with a carnival sideshow than with a court of law. Trump’s team is rightly preparing to challenge emphatic missteps in the appellate court, where reasonable legal minds could shine a light on the absurdities of this entire affair.
Trump’s legal battles are not over, however, as the looming possibility of a motion to transfer this case to federal court has emerged in light of recent Supreme Court rulings affirming presidential immunity. While some speculate whether Merchan’s delay is an attempt to backtrack from a case destined for failure, others suggest it could be a trap to keep Trump tied to these charges long after he has dutifully served as president again. Regardless of the motives, there’s little doubt that Trump’s team is working tirelessly to ensure the truth prevails, bringing the circus back to the orderly tent of justice rather than a stage for leftist political theatrics.
As the legal saga unfolds, it remains to be seen whether the courts will return to the rule of law or continue down this dark path of politicized justice. The outcome will determine not only Trump’s future but also the integrity of the American legal system itself.
