Covering the Trump trial: Dershowitz and others
Unlike most states, New York forbids courtroom cameras except for a few meaningless exceptions. Therefore our news of the historic Trump trial – and in this case the word “historic” is apropos – gets filtered to the public by the MSM, which hates Trump. So it’s not just the trial itself which is unjust, it’s the coverage.
How very convenient for the left. They can spin it any way they want, and it is difficult to counter what they’re saying. Transcripts are available, but few people will be seeking them out. To top it all off, there’s a gag order against Trump, who is barred from speaking about many aspects of the trial.
The power of this New York court to railroad – and try to silence – a former president and the current leading candidate and probable nominee of the GOP is extraordinary. Not only that, look at how the MSM is covering the efforts of others to get the word out. This NBC article, for example, is titled “Trump increasingly relies on allies to deliver the attack lines the gag order bars him from uttering: Legal experts say it might be challenging for the prosecution to try to argue that Trump is responsible for criticism by others.”
It might be hard to blame him for what other people say? Ya think? Ya think? It might be hard to bar the entire right from criticizing “witnesses, prosecutors, jurors or court staff members, as well the families of those people and of the judge presiding over the case”? So Michael Cohen can lie and lie and lie and Trump faces penalties if he calls him out, but the left would like to stop Trump supporters from doing so.
It’s not enough that the left controls the trial and almost the entire MSM and have gagged Trump, they would like to control every aspect of the messaging on this trial.
That’s why someone like Alan Dershowitz – who is not a Trump supporter but who actually believes he and everyone else should get a fair trial, and who is very familiar with courtroom proceedings – is vital as an observer and commenter on the goings-on. Dershowitz is very incensed at the travesty the trial has become. Watch the following video:
If you don’t have time to watch, read this:
HANNITY: I’ve got to imagine in all the years you practice law, have you ever seen anything like this?
DERSHOWITZ: No, I never have. I sat in the front row, literally just feet away from where all the action occurred. I rolled my eyes when the judge made some rulings that were absurd. Any first-year evidence student would understand that he was making biased rulings in favor of one side.
I stared him down, but Costello didn’t. He acted like a normal witness and the judge went berserk. The judge violated Trump’s constitutional right to a public trial by kicking the media out of the courtroom. I don’t know why I wasn’t kicked out, and I heard him lecture Costello… “What you did was contemptuous. You looked at me contemptuously…”
…it reminded me of Mae West when a judge said, you’re showing contempt for the court and Mae West said no, Your Honor, I’m trying my best to hide my contempt for the court.
I’m sure Costello was trying to hide his contempt for the court, but the judge had such a thin skin that he threatened him. He said he would strike the testimony and hold him in contempt if he rolled his eyes again. You have a constitutional right to roll your eyes and to stare at anybody. It was absurd!
In particular – and what especially drew Dershowitz’s ire in the video I posted – was that the judge threatened to strike the testimony of Costello, which means that the jury would be instructed to disregard it. This is really unprecedented, especially for eye-rolling. It makes a further travesty of a trial that is already a tremendous travesty. And Dershowitz also points out the because the judge dismissed the press and jury while he had his tantrum, the idea was that no one would see it except the trial participants. Perhaps Judge Merchan was unaware of who Dershowitz is, because he was one of the few people allowed to stay in the room.
It occurred to me a day or two ago that Americans would benefit from a dramatic reading of the trial testimony, and today to my surprise I discovered that such a thing exists. I haven’t listened yet, but here’s a link to an article explaining how this came to be, and here’s the reading:
NOTE: It also occurs to me that for many young people with little knowledge of law and little experience of how strange all of this is, it seems ordinary and fitting. Their main concern would be whether the trial will be successful in getting Trump rather than whether it is fair. It also occurs to me that such ignorance and/or “ends justify the means” mentality is hardly limited to the young, although I’m assuming it’s more common in that group.
Joe Nierman, aka GoodLawgic, is the best! Huzzah.
Many feel this is fully justified. Any way to get Trump and keep him out of office is necessary to save Democracy. They are fully convinced that if he wins the election and takes office he’ll suspend the Constitution and rule as a dictator. This belief allows them to justify extreme action. I’ll be surprised if Trump takes office without being hurt.
I have no legal background, so I have a question for any attorney following this blog. Is there any avenue for some legal consequences (sanction, removal from the bench, etc?) for this judge’s behavior? Or, can he get away with all of his repellent behaviors?
I guess I’m asking, is he answerable to any oversight?
And Julie Kelly covering the “other” Trump trial in Florida: https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1793414610927919107?t=03gbX5ZpkAqN6OjdiVisKw&s=19
no the new york state bar is a den of scum and villainy, according to my sources,
they will nibble on some abuses, like they blocked the ban on trump properties and some sanctions, but they won’t reverse the greater ones like the kaplan charge, or engoron,
It doesn’t matter that there’s no evidence of a crime, much less of guilt. All that matters is that Trump be crushed by whatever means are necessary.
“Many feel this is fully justified. Any way to get Trump and keep him out of office is necessary to save Democracy. They are fully convinced that if he wins the election and takes office he’ll suspend the Constitution and rule as a dictator.” William
Projection. Told it is necessary ‘to save democracy’, they are supporting the evisceration of the rule of law. When told it is necessary to stop “the deplorables and irredeemables”, they will support the suspension of the Constitution and dictatorial rule by political puppets, unelected bureaucrats and influential oligarchs.
My wife has served on three juries. Two of them murder trials. She knows a bit about how trials are conducted.
She has been following this trial carefully. She is aghast at what is occurring. Today, she confided in me that she had a nightmare about being falsely indicted with some trumped up charge such as putting a Trump sign on our lawn.
I wish I could assure her that the nightmare will never come true. The only way out of this nightmare is for us all to support and vote for law-and-order candidates of the highest caliber.
Addendum: I’ve been called for jury duty four times. Never was put on a jury. I wonder why. Maybe it’s because I’m a military vet, believe strongly in law and order, no beard, a military style haircut, and don’t mince words in questions asked during the jury screening. Just a guess. 🙂
I think the judge is elected, not appointed. If New York ethics rules don’t provide for sanctions for this kind of outrageous judicial behavior, the only remedy might be losing an election.
Some people try to get out of jury duty by lying. You don’t have to lie.
Tell the judge the truth. Tell him you’d make a terrific juror because you can spot guilty people … just like that.
–George Carlin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwQmu0xfQeQ
I don’t even trust the police anymore. They are the cutting edge of big government. The FBI lethal force talk is just insane. For course that force would be aimed at the Secret Service.
J.J., those non-minced words will get you every time! 🙂
RRS– Don’t conflate FBI with actual real police. Not the same breed of cat.
Worst jury duty for me was three trials in three days. One time the case was settled while we were sent out of the room. One time the case was settled during jury selection. Once convicted some poor slob that I didn’t want to and once acquitted someone that I didn’t want who deserved at least a good whipping. My god she was smug leaving the courtroom.
I am very, very glad I don’t live on the East coast. Or the West coast. I read accounts of what the judges do and have done in the Trump trials and ask myself what the Hell country is this? In the America I grew up in I would expect that if the Hamas terrorists were tried here they would get a fair trial. I find that I’m giddy when reading about Judge Cannon -Just For Doing Her Job.
Dark, Dark days.
And from the “Protecting Democracy” folio…
‘Senate GOP sees ‘dumb’ bid to boost incumbents with meaningless Schumer border vote;
‘In 2020, Democrats treated border security as a “racist dog whistle.” But they’ve started to listen to pollsters. “[T]hey don’t really think that they can pass it. So it’s just messaging on their side,” Alaska GOP Sen. Murkowski said.’—
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/senate-gop-sees-dumb-bid-boost-incumbents-schumer-border-vote
(Good Lord, even Murkowski can see it…)
“Grassley: Obama State Department blocked FBI’s effort to arrest Iranian suspects”—
https://justthenews.com/government/security/grassley-obama-state-department-blocked-fbis-effort-arrest-iranian-suspects
(Now THAT’S what allies are for!)
“Judge grants Hunter Biden request to delay start of federal tax trial from June to September”—
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/judge-grants-hunter-biden-request-delay-start-june-september
(This one can be cross-filed with the “Running Out the Clock” Dossier…)
“Most impactful Hunter Biden documents from new IRS whistleblower cache”—
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/most-impactful-hunter-biden-documents-new-irs-whistleblower-cache
(Yawnnnn… Nothing to see here, folks…etc.)
Retired NYS attorney here. There is a judicial ethics commission in New York that can and does sanction judges for misbehavior. But it’s rare for things to reach that point — it’s usually judges with a long track record of outrages, and it takes a while. Plus, it’s not usually this sort of politicized misbehavior. Until recently, judges just didn’t act like this. It used to be that the threat of being reversed on appeal was all that was needed. Reversals are issued in published decisions with explanatory details that, when necessary, include direct, pointed criticism of whatever the judge did to earn the reversal. Most reversals are based on good-faith legal errors by trial judges, but even then, they’re never fun. Too many affect your chances for appointments to higher courts, important committees, and ultimately re-election. And they’re particularly embarrassing and politically destructive when they’re based on unprofessionalism like Merchan’s extreme bias and disregard of legal norms, not to mention statutory and Constitutional requirements.
However, this particular judge does not seem to be the least bit worried about reversal or about his legacy, and seems to be proceeding on the assumption he’ll be celebrated, not criticized. I’m very much afraid he’s right. Even if he is reversed (and I am not at all not sure that I trust the Appellate Division First Department to do that, even on this record), the media will celebrate him as right and the appellate court as wrong, and most media-conditioned New Yorkers will agree.
Kate, you’re right that most NY Supreme Court judges are elected, but J. Merchan was not. Under the NYS Constitution, all Supreme Court judges are supposed to be elected by the voters in their districts. But there aren’t enough elected seats to handle the caseload, so for many years Acting Supreme Court Judges (jovially known as Acting Supremes) have been appointed by the governor or the Chief Administrative Judge. The appointees very often come from the NY Court of Claims. That court handles claims against the State, and its judges are appointed, not elected. It’s common for ambitious attorneys to make an end run around the electorate by pulling political strings to get themselves appointed first to the Court of Claims and then to the Supremes. That’s what happened with Merchan, who was appointed to the Court of Claims in 2009 and also appointed as an Acting Supreme that same year. His term is supposed to expire in 2028, but all they’ll have to do is reappoint him as an Acting. Voters will never get a whack at him, even if you could trust NYC voters to assess him fairly, which, unfortunately, you can’t.
Worse, by my count, Merchan’s judicial bio on the nycourts.gov page shows he’s been appointed to various courts five times, and never elected to any of them. Before that, he served in the State Attorney General’s office and before that, in the NY County DA’s office. Meaning, he’s politically very well connected indeed, and we can assume that he’s not going anywhere.
There are lots of good reasons to criticize choosing judges by election, as they aren’t supposed to be political figures, and they’re supposed to base their decisions on the law, not on what will enhance their chances of re-election. However, Merchan is a poster child for the danger of insulating judges in such powerful positions from voters. There was a reason the NY Constitution was originally written to have trial court judges chosen by the people.
Mrs+Whatsit, you’re right. Merchan is the man and has been well provided for. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Michelle Obama appoint him to the Supreme Court for his heroics in jailing Trump and ending his foray into politics, though not nominating a POC might be a bridge too far for her handlers.
IIRC, he’s Hispanic.
Should be enough.
He was a party to the last fleecing abouf trumps real estate seminar
Conversely he gave a real hooker (colleague of daniels?) A 250 k and 6 months senate
Having already heard about a shouting judge, we now present a shouting prosecutor…(seems to be a pattern, here)…and guess whom he’s prosecuting!
‘…It’s not so much that it was a “shouting match.” It’s what they were shouting about.’—
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2024/05/its-not-so-much-that-it-was-shouting.html
H/T Instapundit.
https://instapundit.com/649437/
More Trial Theater….
“Watch: Cruz, Kennedy Destroy Biden Judge For Placing ‘6 Foot 2 Serial Child Rapist’ In Women’s Prison”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-cruz-kennedy-destroy-biden-judge-placing-6-foot-2-serial-child-rapist-womens-prison
But we all know that there ain’t no such thing as a “Biden judge” or a “Biden judge” or a “Biden judge”.
(Judge Roberts told us hisself and he orta know.)
To be fair—and just—though, that judge is just doin’ what she knows she’s gotta do.
File under: The GOP is now the party that protects Women (and girls).
Marzipants, his first name is Juan, so he may very well count as a POC for the left.
Mrs. Whatsit, thanks. I have appreciated your comments here about this matter and about New York courts. It must be very discouraging for fair-minded New Yorkers to see what is going on.
You’re welcome, Kate, and you’re right, it’s discouraging and downright embarrassing.