Showing posts with label Clarence Thomas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clarence Thomas. Show all posts

Friday, January 10, 2025

Trump response to Judge Merchan


What a joke to say that this was a "deeply divided Supreme Court" is a joke! But they have decided to permit New York to brand President-elect Trump as a convicted felon ten days before he enters the White House. With Chief Justice John Roberts and Trump-appointed Justice Amy Coney Barrett (TRAITORS!) joining the Court’s three progressives Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson the Court greenlighted New York State Judge Juan Merchan’s determination to sentence the president-elect at 9:30 a.m. Friday morning. 

The sentencing was triggered by a jury’s guilty verdicts in May on 34 counts of business-records falsification brought by Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg. Four conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Trump appointees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh indicated that they would have granted Trump’s petition to postpone sentencing. 

But In a ruling last week, denying Trump’s post-trial motions and scheduling sentencing for Friday morning, Judge Merchan indicated that he would sentence Trump to an unconditional discharge meaning no jail time, no probation, no fine, and no post-sentencing monitoring of any kind. Merchan also ruled that Trump would not need to attend the sentencing in person. 

The president-elect has announced that he will not be in attendance at the courthouse in lower Manhattan on Friday. He will attend the sentencing remotely to minimize the burden the proceeding will place on the ongoing transition leading up to Inauguration Day on January 20.



The majority rationalized that Trump will not be meaningfully harmed by the sentencing, for two principal reasons. First, the Court did not rule on the merits of Trump’s contention that presidential immunity from criminal prosecution was violated by the district attorney’s introduction at trial of evidence of his official presidential acts. That is, Trump will still be able to raise on appeal his immunity claim, along with various other claims of significant error in the proceedings. The appeal cannot proceed until Trump is sentenced and the judgment is entered, so sentencing will clear the way for that process.

Second, the Court effectively locked Merchan into his stated inclination to give Trump a conditional discharge sentence. In theory, Merchan’s signaling of that intention (in a written opinion last week) was not binding technically, a judge is not supposed to decide the sentence until hearing from the parties at the sentencing proceeding, which won’t happen until Friday morning. Regardless, the Supreme Court majority’s conclusion that the sentencing poses minimal burden on Trump’s presidential transition hinges on Merchan’s assurance that he was leaning toward a no-jail, no-probation sentence. 

If Merchan were to change his mind at this point and impose a term of incarceration, the High Court would regard it as a betrayal. Practically speaking, then, Merchan has no choice but to do what he indicated he would do. The majority also relied on Merchan’s directive that Trump did not need to attend the sentencing in person, meaning the proceeding should be brief and minimally intrusive to Trump’s conduct of the presidential transition. There is no dissenting opinion from the four conservative justices. 

Presumably, they concluded that the same considerations that induced the Court to recognize presidential immunity in its July opinion (in Trump v. United States) also supported immunity for presidents-elect principally, the imperative that the president not be distracted by the anxiety and stigma attendant to criminal proceedings while executing his unparalleled constitutional responsibilities. 

In presidential transitions, as Congress has legislatively underscored, a president-elect is engaged in preparing to take on those responsibilities from the first hours of a new administration. 
With Trump having exhausted his avenues to prevent the sentencing, it proceeded which is just a shame but it is what it is.


This trial is a joke and we all know it is and as Trump said it's 'Great embarrassment' and he said it in the courtroom response to Judge Merchan's 'political witch hunt' trial which like he said "Should have never been brought..." The audio tape of President-elect Trump’s New York City sentencing hearing was released to the public on Friday, giving insight into the unprecedented conviction against a former president where Trump was ultimately sentenced to an unconditional discharge. 

"This has been a very terrible experience," Trump, who virtually attended the criminal trial sentencing hearing, told the New York City courtroom on Friday morning. "I think it's been a tremendous setback for New York and the New York court system." But Trump really did express the facts here in the statement he gave as he brought up the clear fact that and I quote again "This is a case that Alvin Bragg did not want to bring. 

He thought it was, from what I read and from what I hear, inappropriately handled before he got there. And a gentleman from a law firm came in and acted as a district attorney," President Trump continued. "And that gentleman, from what I heard, was a criminal or almost criminal in what he did. It was very inappropriate. It was somebody involved with my political opponent." And he continued by saying During the hearing, Merchan defended the actions he took along the way.


"The imposition of sentence is one of the most difficult decisions that any criminal court judge is called to make," Merchan said, noting the court "must consider the facts of the case along with any aggravating or mitigating circumstances." Merchan reflected on the case, saying that "never before has this court been presented with such a unique set of circumstances." The judge said it was an "extraordinary case" with media interest and heightened security but said that once the courtroom doors were closed, the trial itself "was not any more unique or extraordinary" than any other case.

Merchan acknowledged that Trump is afforded significant legal protections, but argued that "one power they do not provide is the power to erase a jury verdict." This will be pardoned when he becomes President and another Appeal should be done to make sure that lump sum of money is not paid as Trump did nothing wrong, and I hope he spends a little time taking aim at this crooked Judge when he becomes President in a few days and gets the Judge disbarred and thrown in PRISON! 

"I think it's an embarrassment to New York and New York has a lot of problems, but this is a great embarrassment," he added. At one point, Trump, appearing virtually, leaned forward, looking at Judge Juan Merchan, and referenced the November election, suggesting that it represented a repudiation of this case.

"It's been a political witch hunt," Trump explained. "It was done to damage my reputation so that I'd lose the election. And obviously, that didn't work. And the people of our country got to see this firsthand because they watched the case in your courtroom. They got to see this firsthand. And then they voted, and I won." 

Assistant District Attorney Josh Steinglass stated that there was "overwhelming evidence to support the jury's verdict" and was critical of Trump, claiming the president-elect "has caused enduring damage to public perception of the criminal justice system and has placed officers of the court in harm's way" with the comments he publicly made during the trial. 


"I very, very much disagree with much of what the government just said about this case, about the legitimacy of what happened in this courtroom during the trial and about President Trump's conduct fighting this case from before it was indicted, while it was indicted, to the jury's verdict, and even to this day," Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche said in response to the prosecution.

During the hearing, Merchan defended the actions he took along the way. "The imposition of sentence is one of the most difficult decisions that any criminal court judge is called to make," Merchan said, noting the court "must consider the facts of the case along with any aggravating or mitigating circumstances." Merchan reflected on the case, saying that "never before has this court been presented with such a unique set of circumstances."

The judge said it was an "extraordinary case" with media interest and heightened security but said that once the courtroom doors were closed, the trial itself "was not any more unique or extraordinary" than any other case. 

Merchan acknowledged that Trump is afforded significant legal protections, but argued that "one power they do not provide is the power to erase a jury verdict." A Verdict on charges which are a joke! The Jury was a joke, and this Judge and his daughter made money off this case.

This is a disgusting betrayal of the Judge seat he holds and this and all these corrupt judges need to be removed and disbarred. "Sir, I wish you Godspeed as you assume the second term in office," Merchan said at the close of the hearing.


Tuesday, May 12, 2020

Tara Reade’s lawyers demand Joe Biden turn over docs

Lawyers for& Joe Biden sex accuser Tara Reade & on Monday demanded that JOE China! Went a head, and opened up his archives at the University of Delaware and pushed a Senate official to hand over any documents related to the case which makes sense right he kept saying if any record was made it would be there? Now what are the chances that for former V.P in charge of getting people fired in Ukraine won’t have any docs there someone decided to make them gone?

Multiple sources have now corroborated former staffer Tara Reade’s sexual assault claims against Joe Biden, so why aren’t more media outlets covering the story? Mike Papantonio and Farron Cousins discuss.

[fvplayer id=”62″]

Top sex-harassment lawyer Douglas Wigdor told Biden that he must “authorize a search [of his university archives] to determine whether they contain any records related to Ms. Reade” evoking the former US senator from Delaware’s controversial handling of the Anita Hill controversy in 1991. Biden was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee that weighed Hill’s sex-harass allegations against then-US Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas and has since apologized for his actions at the time. “You have been criticized heavily about being Chairman of the all-white, all-male Judiciary Committee that grilled Professor Hill in excruciatingly graphic detail (including about penis size, pubic hair and pornographic film stars),” Wigdor wrote Biden. Noting the former Bidens’s Mea culpa since, Wigdor said he hopes it does “not ring hollow” now. “Ms. Reade too is entitled to the process she deserves,” the lawyer wrote. Biden’s Senate papers are archived at the university, and Reade’s camp has said the trove potentially includes a complaint she filed with a congressional personnel office in 1993 after he allegedly stuck his hand up her skirt and said, “I want to f–k you.” Biden has denied the claim, said he is unaware of any complaint and refused to open up his archives, saying they do not contain “personnel files” and that other information in them could be used against him during his continuing presidential campaign.

But Wigdor fired back in the letter, “To be frank, we … see no reason why an efficient, diligent and fair search of the Archives cannot be completed in short order.” Wigdor also sent a letter to the general counsel for Secretary of the Senate Julie Adams, who has already turned down Reade’s request for a copy of her alleged personnel complaint, saying that even if it existed, she has “no discretion to disclose any such information,” citing confidentiality restrictions. Wigdor noted that Biden had already agreed to allow the Senate secretary to release the document, if it exists — but that this was just a “disingenuous” ploy on his part, since he knew what Adams would say.

Regardless, “To put it simply, there is no basis, either in law, equity or common sense, for the Secretary to refuse to reproduce a copy of Ms. Reade’s [complaint] to her,” Widgor wrote Adams’ counsel. Asked for comment Monday, a Biden rep sent The Post a previous statement his camp has made on the subject. “As someone who committed himself to changing the culture surrounding violence against women in this country, Vice President Biden knows it is paramount that women should come forward and be heard respectfully,” the statement said. “But it is also the duty of the press to base their assessments of claims on careful and exhaustive review of the facts. And an inescapable fact in the case of these false allegations is that more and more inconsistencies keep emerging.” Adams’ office did not respond to a request for comment.