Judge’s bias in ‘hush-money’ trial leads to guilty verdict for Trump

Joe Biden is eagerly anticipating the potential conviction of his political rival in the Stormy Daniels hush money trial in Manhattan, as jury deliberations are scheduled to commence this week.

If Donald Trump is indeed found guilty in the first criminal prosecution of a former president, it would be an injustice and a blatant attempt to manipulate the 2024 presidential election.

However, this tactic runs the risk of backfiring on Biden, similar to how Republican attacks on Bill Clinton regarding his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky were received. Voters typically disapprove of the misuse of legal authority to regulate private morals. Despite Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s efforts to frame his prosecution of Trump as a campaign-finance violation, it is clear to everyone that the underlying intention was the sensationalized retelling of his alleged tryst with a porn star that intrigued viewers of MSNBC.

According to Politico, Biden plans to deliver a statement addressing the verdict in a “White House setting — not a campaign one — to show his statement isn’t political.” Hah! As if.

Biden’s true intentions revealed

Anything Biden says will inevitably carry a hint of political gamesmanship, regardless of efforts by his media allies to paint his stance as a “vow of silence” and an elegant rise above his opponent’s legal dilemmas.

Biden has been making subtle jabs, like when he playfully “challenged” Trump to a debate and remarked, “I hear you have Wednesdays free.” Wednesdays are when the hush-money trial does not take place.

During his speech at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Biden joked: “I had a great stretch since the State of the Union. But Donald has had a few tough days lately. You might call it ‘stormy weather.'” Classic.

The real irony lies in the pretense that Biden is tactfully avoiding capitalizing on his rival’s mounting legal troubles. In reality, he is simply trying to sidestep fueling suspicions that he exploited the DOJ to target his political adversary, with assistance from Democratic DAs Alvin Bragg in New York and Fani Willis in Georgia, all because he lacks substantive achievements or vision to stand on independently.

By bleeding Trump of resources and campaigning time in swing states, while tarnishing his reputation, Biden is clearly gaining an unfair advantage and cannot resist taunting him with petty remarks. His supporters incessantly bring up Trump’s legal issues, and a super PAC ironically named Unite the Country is reportedly spending $40 million on ads targeting Trump’s legal entanglements. Despite these efforts, polls indicate that the indictments are only boosting the former president politically.

Even those consumed by anti-Trump sentiments acknowledge that Manhattan Supreme Court Acting Justice Juan Merchan is biased. He was previously cautioned by the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct for making modest donations to Biden and other Democrats. Additionally, his daughter, Loren Merchan, is allegedly profiting from the trial through her consulting firm as her Democratic clients supposedly capitalize on the trial her father presides over by raising campaign funds.

It was a glaring oversight for Merchan to not recuse himself, tarnishing the credibility of the New York legal system in the process.

Instead of proving that his personal political leanings do not influence his courtroom conduct, Merchan has showcased blatant bias.

Unfair treatment towards Cohen

He gave preferential treatment to prosecution star witness Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, a convicted perjurer and swindler who admitted in court to embezzling $60,000 from the Trump Organization out of spite for a reduced bonus. “I just felt like it was self-help,” was how Cohen justified his theft.

In contrast, the judge restricted defense witnesses — if he allowed them to testify at all.

Consider the instance when Cohen’s former attorney Bob Costello testified. An esteemed former prosecutor and deputy chief of the criminal division of the Southern District of New York, Costello clearly outshines Merchan in terms of reputation, expertise, and experience — which might explain the judge’s sensitivity and insecurity during his testimony.

Costello contradicted Cohen’s contention that Trump directed him to make the hush-money payment, asserting that although Cohen was desperate and “manic” to avoid prison time, he had repeatedly affirmed to his legal team that “Trump knew nothing about those payments.”

This testimony was pivotal for Trump’s defense, or it would have been had Merchan not upheld every prosecution objection, accused Costello of “side-eyeing” him and “staring [him] down,” expelled the media and public from the courtroom, and overall implied to the jurors that Costello was an unreliable witness.

Juries often develop a sort of “Stockholm Syndrome” dynamic with their judges, so Merchan’s attitude towards the witness significantly impacted the weight given to his testimony.

Constitutional lawyer David Schoen, who represented Trump in his initial impeachment, labeled Merchan’s actions as “shocking” and “reprehensible.”

The judge never informed Costello that he had placed “very narrow limitations” on his testimony. Trump’s attorneys should have advised Costello accordingly instead of allowing the prosecution to object to nearly everything he said, leading to understandable frustration.

“But muttering ‘Jeez’ sotto voce is not a punishable offense,” Schoen remarked. “It is perplexing how the judge could have perceived Costello rolling his eyes when his back was turned towards Merchan . . . Merchan closing the courtroom and accusing Bob of ‘staring [him] down’ is utterly bizarre, reprimanding him for contemptuous behavior was wholly inappropriate.”

Constitutional violations

Schoen alleges that by clearing the courtroom, Merchan violated Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to a public trial. He cited other New York cases where convictions were overturned due to a judge, for example, dismissing a defendant’s father from the courtroom to accommodate potential jurors.

Schoen criticized Trump’s attorneys for failing to adequately prepare Costello, not standing up for him during the judge’s outburst, and neglecting to move for a mistrial after the court was cleared.

Merchan’s handling of the trial has been so disastrous that any guilty verdict is likely to be overturned on appeal. However, this reversal will occur after the election, enabling Biden to smear his opponent as a “convicted felon,” which is clearly the desired outcome.

Nevertheless, the American people are astute to this maneuver, and Biden should tread cautiously in his aspirations.