Judge Merchan is totally bias!!
- Thread starter mitchell76
- Start date
If we forget about the legal side of it, why is there a case? There are no new facts for the public to consider in making their political choice (other than Cohen now admits to stealing from Trump).
Why didn't Trumptard testify when Alina Habba kept saying he is going to testify, WHY DONALD WHY???
Trump CONFRONTED: Why didn't you testify? Trump IMPLODES
Trump CONFRONTED: Why didn't you testify? Trump IMPLODES
and what is Justice Alito doing flying the stop the steal flag? He should be removed ( and Thomas too).
Mitchy, do you remember Al Bundy? Do you like Ed O'Neill?
I can't believe that uber liberal New York is in play but it is. That's how bad a job Biden and fellow Un Democrats have done.
Mitchy, since you did not answer me I am going to guess Married with Children was one of your favorite shows and you idolized Al Bundy, this one is for you. I promise it will not mess up your algorithm as that is already a mess..
That's the point here. Did the judge make any errors that would warrant an appeal? We don't know the jury instructions yet, and I am not a legal scholar/lawyer. But, from the coverage I've read from credible news sources (unlike @mitchell76 twitter dregs), the judge has acted with restraint, has been impartial and fair. It will be a hard hill to climb for Trump's defence....
The Daniels testimony was spicy. But he didn't allow it. If you understand what happened, she went off the rails when questioned. He specifically told the defence that it was their job to object to this type of thing....which they didn't. Trump's team wanted a mistrial. He denied it. It is doubtful this would be worthy of appeal.
As for the witness, there is a long-standing precedent about expert witnesses. Basically, they are not allowed to interpret the law, which is what the defence wanted. And, the prosecution already had an expert witness, so the defence could have used him to prove their point. But they didn't. And, there was a legit concern that bringing in another so-called expert would just confuse the jury. That is probably what Trump's team wanted, but 99% of judges (with the exception of maybe Aileen Cannon) would not allow.
Now, as I have mentioned in a previous post, I am not a lawyer. But from the credible news sources covering the trial, there isn't a lot of concern about the appeal. But, again, that also depends on a conviction, which is never an assured thing.
Let me put it this way: Trump lies about everything. And he has also posted controversial stuff in the past. Are you telling me there is no chance he didn't post it himself, even by mistake? And he might not have taken it down, that could have been a staff member who realized they were saying the quite part loud...
Now, to be honest, I really don't think he posted it. BUT....as mentioned above....there is a chance that he did.
