Alan Dershowitz FLASHBACK.
JD Vance Calmly Explains ‘Sham’ Prosecution Of Donald Trump As Wolf Blitzer Stammers
Alvin Bragg’s former colleague/current CNN legal analyst called out the rigged Trump case
A former colleague of both Alvin Bragg and Todd Blanche at the Southern District of New York AND a senior legal analyst at CNN just trashed the charges brought against Trump by Bragg and the trial itself as an “ill-conceived, unjustified mess.”
Elie Honig doesn’t fault the jury for doing their job, but rips everything else about the trial in new article in the New York Magazine.
Here’s what he has to say:
[….]
…The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever. Even putting aside the specifics of election law, the Manhattan DA itself almost never brings any case in which falsification of business records is the only charge.
Standing alone, falsification charges would have been mere misdemeanors under New York law, which posed two problems for the DA. First, nobody cares about a misdemeanor, and it would be laughable to bring the first-ever charge against a former president for a trifling offense that falls within the same technical criminal classification as shoplifting a Snapple and a bag of Cheetos from a bodega. Second, the statute of limitations on a misdemeanor — two years — likely has long expired on Trump’s conduct, which dates to 2016 and 2017….
CNN Legal Panel Says There’s ‘Great Likelihood’ Of Trump Overturning Verdict On Numerous ‘Issues’
Attorneys On CNN Rip Merchan For Throwing Constitution ‘Out A Window’ With ‘Bad’ Jury Instructions
Hans von Spakovsky: New York might as well rename itself Venezuela following Trump trial verdict
….‘One of the Craziest Things’
Constitutional law expert Hans von Spakovsky says the conviction isn’t likely to stick, for an array of reasons. Chief among them: Merchan’s convoluted jury instructions, in which the Biden campaign-donor judge framed the jury’s deliberations in a way that, according to legal expert Jonathan Turley, “seemed less like a jury deliberation than a canned hunt.” Merchan told the jurors they didn’t have to agree on the three possible “unlawful means” prosecutors vaguely alleged Trump had employed to “influence” the 2016 election.
“The jurors were told that they could split on what occurred, with four jurors accepting each of the three possible crimes in a 4-4-4 split. The court would still consider that a unanimous verdict so long as they agree that it was in furtherance of some crime,” Turley wrote in the Hill before the verdict was handed down.
Accomplice media outlets running interference for Biden and his minions — and attempting to influence the 2024 election — collectively wailed that conservative news outlets have been misrepresenting Merchan’s jury instructions. But there’s no denying the unusual nature of the judge’s explanations at the end of a deeply legally flawed trial.
Von Spakovsky said Merchan’s instructions point to reversible error — “an error in trial proceedings that affects a party’s rights so significantly that it is grounds for reversal if the affected party properly objected at trial,” according to the Legal Information Institute.
“This is such a mistake. … If I were the court of appeals, the moment this case came in, I would overturn the conviction,” the former Federal Election Commission member and Heritage Foundation fellow told me before the verdict this week on the Simon Conway Show. “That is one of the craziest things I have ever heard and it is a complete violation of President Trump’s substantive due process rights.”
Von Spakovsky said the standard in like cases is that jurors come to a unanimous agreement on each of the charges they are deliberating. He said Merchan added an absurd twist to the proceedings after handicapping Trump’s defense throughout the trial.
Threw the Constitution ‘Out the Window’
Defense attorney Randy Zelin told CNN that Merchan’s jury instructions contained a “key flaw.”
“Whether you are driving in a Ford or a Ferrari, if someone gives you bad directions, you’re going to end up lost. And those jury instructions were just a complete, just take the Constitution, throw it out a window, burn it, shoot it and hang it,” the attorney said on “CNN Special Report.”
Turley told Fox News that the “trial is a target rich environment for appeal,” although he said the appeal will likely “stretch beyond the election.”
Speaker Mike Johnson has called on the U.S. Supreme Court to quickly take up the case because of its unprecedented constitutional implications. The state appeals courts in line to preside over the Trump case are lined with Democrat-appointed judges.
Von Spakovsky said the courts should act as expeditiously as the Supreme Court did in the Colorado ballot access case in which it unanimously overturned the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling kicking Trump off the state presidential primary ballot.
As for Merchan, von Spakovsky said the judge is either one of the most incompetent judges he has ever seen or his curious instructions to the jury was “a sign of intentional misfeasance.”
“In fact, I think it’s the latter because throughout this entire case he has acted as if he is an alternate member of the prosecution team,” the legal expert said. ….
