GREGG JARRETT: New York judge desperate to label Trump a ‘convicted felon’ before inauguration

New York Judge Juan MerchanFriday’s dogmatic refusal to dismiss the wild case against President-elect Donald Trump and instead proceed to sentencing on January 10 It’s another middle finger extended to the law. And Trump.

At the same time, Merchan inadvertently admits the folly of the entire accusation by notifying the defendant that neither the court nor District Attorney Alvin Bragg will seek any significant punishment. Trump, the judge falsely warns, would receive “unconditional release” without jail, fine or parole following guilty verdicts by a Manhattan jury last May.

TRUMP BLOWS MERCHAN AND DEMOCRATS WHO ONLY WANT ‘A POUND OF FLESH’ AMID FAILED CASES

Never mind that state law does not support a prison sentence in these circumstances. Let’s forget that the district attorney deliberately distorted statutes and destroyed evidence to carry out a meritless prosecution motivated purely by political revenge. And ignore the fact that there is little chance that the biased jury’s guilty verdict, compounded by Merchan’s Chronic Reversible Errorswill withstand judicial scrutiny on appeal. Eventually.

It seems obvious that Merchan is desperate to smear Trump with the formal label of “convicted felon.” To do this, he must sentence the incoming president. A jury verdict alone is insufficient under the law. Hence the offer of what amounts to a non-sentence if only Trump would at least appear virtually during a hearing 10 days before he is sworn in.

It is another farce designed to close—and cover up—a false trial. Present yourself to be verbally tarred and feathered, but no stocks or pillory will be deployed.

In one sense, it may be tempting to accept Merchan’s contingent surrender. Because? Under the law, Trump cannot challenge the judge’s myriad errors at trial, as well as the prosecution’s misleading legal theory, until the verdict is handed down. Only then will he be officially “condemned.” A successful appeal overturns the conviction, even if belatedly.

And therein lies the problem.

The average defendant would accept the Faustian deal that guarantees no jail time and the appeals process immediately begins. But Trump is different. He is a hardened fighter who refuses to capitulate, even when his opponents face reproaches. It’s one of the many reasons voters rewarded him with a second term. He doesn’t give up or give up. You shouldn’t do it either.

A competent or objective judge would have long ago thrown Trump’s accusation into the trash where it belonged. At first glance, it was patently flawed, if not ridiculous, and a clearly politicized prosecution.

Trump is determined to clear his name. Therefore, you can expect his legal team to challenge Merchán’s ruling in both dismissal and sentencing. There are several legal options available, such as requesting an emergency “stay” from the appeals courts which, if granted, could push any subsequent proceedings beyond the January 20 inauguration.

Since it is well established that presidents are immune to any criminal proceedings while he is in office—a principle that even Merchán accepts—a court-ordered pause would effectively delay sentencing until 2029. Of course, that assumes the case still has a pulse four years from now.

Trump has a credible argument that the verdicts against him should be overturned now. As president-elect, his lawyers maintain that “immediate removal is mandated by the federal Constitution, the Presidential Transition Act of 1963, and the interests of justice.” The ruling would disrupt the orderly transfer of executive power.

Judge Juan Merchán watches as Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump attends his criminal trial on charges of falsifying business records to conceal money paid to silence porn star Stormy Daniels in 2016, in Manhattan State Court in Manhattan. New York City, USA May December 30, 2024 in this courtroom sketch. (REUTERS/Jane Rosenberg)

In essence, a state has no right or power to transgress federal laws passed by Congress, including the Transition Act. Interference by a local prosecutor and/or judge constitutes a violation of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

But there are other compelling reasons to end this case as soon as possible.

In an earlier ruling, Merchan readily acknowledged his authority to overturn verdicts if errors were made at trial that warranted reversal. However, he stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the plethora of errors that require dismissal.

Chief among them is that prosecutors relied on tainted evidence prohibited in the presidential immunity standard enunciated by the Supreme Court on July 1. Testimony from White House officials and numerous presidential records should never have been presented. Merchan ignores all this by insisting that such evidence was insignificant, even though prosecutors emphasized this during closing arguments to the jury.

He also turned a blind eye to Bragg’s convoluted and incoherent legal theory that it must somehow be a crime to conceal a perfectly legal confidentiality agreement. It is not. He then allowed the district attorney to destroy the law by resurrecting misdemeanors from expired business registrations and transmuting them into phantom election crimes that were falsely portrayed as having undue influence on the 2016 presidential race.

It was a pretty clever trick as Trump’s transactions were recorded and refunded. after the choice. Furthermore, Bragg, as a local prosecutor, had no jurisdiction to enforce federal campaign laws. The payments to former adult film star Stormy Daniels did not even qualify as contributions under any statute or regulation.

As I have noted before, a competent or objective judge would have long ago thrown Trump’s accusation into the trash where it belonged. At first glance, it was patently flawed, if not ridiculous, and a clearly politicized prosecution.

But Bragg’s embarrassing sleight of hand didn’t bother Merchan in the least. Quite the opposite. His lordship cheerfully agreed with the hocus-pocus. At the trial, he shed his black robe to join the jurisprudential circus as co-prosecutor.

When the predetermined verdicts were announced, no one knew exactly what Trump had been convicted of. In theory, the accounting errors were supposedly made to further another crime in an illegal attempt to influence the election.

But what crime? Nobody can say. Were they violations of federal campaign law? Tax laws? Fake business records? Select from the aforementioned menu of imaginary possibilities. Trump doesn’t know because prosecutors never said so. And neither do the juries.

In a dire instruction to the panel, Merchan stated that they did not have to identify what crimes were allegedly perpetrated and that they did not need to reach a unanimous agreement. He abandoned with impunity the fundamental principle of unanimity in criminal convictions that the Supreme Court has repeatedly reinforced.

Merchan’s courtroom became a cesspool of incomprehensible rulings by a conflicted and hostile judge who deprived Trump of a fair trial. Merchan and prosecutors worked together to craft the guilty verdicts. Political bias stifled the defendant’s due process rights. It was a wild case pushed by a district attorney who enthusiastically embraced the Democrats’ corrupt legal campaign against his Republican opponent.

None of this fooled American voters. In fact, it appears to have failed spectacularly. Many were deeply disturbed by how Trump’s adversaries twisted the law to pursue a series of criminal charges designed to destroy his chances of returning to the White House. The outrage was expressed at the polls on November 5. Decisively.

CLICK HERE TO REVIEW MORE FROM FOX NEWS

Despite their best efforts to sabotage the election outcome, the unscrupulous duo of Merchan and Bragg can do nothing now to stop Trump. Even if his planned attempt to stop the sentencing next Friday fails, the new president-elect still benefits. He can begin to appeal the blatant perversion of the law that was imposed against him and the miscarriage of justice that followed.

It was not a fair trial. It was a farce.

Meanwhile, it is up to the incoming Justice Department to open a thorough investigation into the lawfare campaign that special prosecutor Jack Smith, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg launched almost simultaneously and only after Trump announced his candidacy for the elections.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Coincidence? Hardly. There is reason to believe that there was coordination between them with President Joe Biden’s White House or with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Justice Department. Maybe both. If laws are broken, prosecutors should be exposed and held accountable for weaponizing the justice system.

Democrats have spent the last four years lecturing us that no one is above the law. The inconvenient thing is that the same standard is now applied to them.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GREGG JARRETT