A view of the quality of judge Merchan in the Trump trial in NYC

[BackAgain]

Juan Merchan will go down in history as one of the most appallingly dishonest and disgraceful judges ever. It is now clear why he was assigned the Bragg case. The fix was in long before the trial began. And he’s not done. The jury instructions will be horrendously poisonous. His contempt for the justice system is without parallel. To this day, I don’t believe we know the full extent of this man’s conflicts and corruption, including the outside influences and communications. What we do know is bad enough. The question now is whether there will be at least one honorable, courageous, and patriotic juror who will refuse to participate in this Stalinist-Biden sham of all shams, and say no, I cannot and will not go along with this; my country is too important to me to join in killing it. Let’s pray so.

This quote is from the genius, Mark Levin. Truth Social

I previously tried posting it in “politics” (since it remains my contention that the Bragg persecution is political in the manner of an old Soviet show trial), but it got immediately shuttered there upon a couple of alleged grounds.

To rectify that, I altered the thread title and I am adding my own commentary (even though Levin’s words speak for themselves). I also now place it in the legal forum even though I consider that ironic.

It is indeed appalling that any judge would deny any defendant the right to call relevant witnesses. If the Elected NY County persecutor (Bragg) wants to present a case based on deliberately unstated “other” crimes while hinting that the “other” crime “may” involve a collation of an election law, it is absolutely clear that a defendant should be permitted to demonstrate his actual innocence of that “other” (maybe) “crime.”

But hack Merchan would have no part of that.

Why not?

 

[rightwinger]

If Mark Levin says so, it must be true

 

[Donald H]

I previously tried posting it in “politics” (since it remains my contention that the Bragg persecution is political in the manner of an old Soviet show trial), but it got immediately shuttered there upon a couple of alleged grounds.

To rectify that, I altered the thread title and I am adding my own commentary (even though Levin’s words speak for themselves). I also now place it in the legal forum even though I consider that ironic.

It's still now clean according to the rules, but it might be as close as it can get?

 

[BackAgain]

It's still now clean according to the rules, but it might be as close as it can get?

Based on your always biased and irrational thinking?

Try to post on topic, child.

Merchan is a disgrace to the bench

 

[BackAgain]

If Mark Levin says so, it must be true

Not because he says so, stupid child.

But because what he says is well considered and accurate.

You wouldn’t understand.

 

[BlindBoo]

This quote is from the genius, Mark Levin.

Speaking of appallingly bias, disgraceful and dishonest talking heads. Now that el Rushbo is dead, Levin is a leader in that category.

 

[Hollie]

This quote is from the genius, Mark Levin. Truth Social

I previously tried posting it in “politics” (since it remains my contention that the Bragg persecution is political in the manner of an old Soviet show trial), but it got immediately shuttered there upon a couple of alleged grounds.

To rectify that, I altered the thread title and I am adding my own commentary (even though Levin’s words speak for themselves). I also now place it in the legal forum even though I consider that ironic.

It is indeed appalling that any judge would deny any defendant the right to call relevant witnesses. If the Elected NY County persecutor (Bragg) wants to present a case based on deliberately unstated “other” crimes while hinting that the “other” crime “may” involve a collation of an election law, it is absolutely clear that a defendant should be permitted to demonstrate his actual innocence of that “other” (maybe) “crime.”

But hack Merchan would have no part of that.

Why not?

His biases toward the corrupt prosection have been a huge fundraising benefit for his daughter. He will be hailed as a hero of the left.

 

[BackAgain]

Speaking of appallingly bias, disgraceful and dishonest talking heads. Now that el Rushbo is dead, Levin is a leader in that category.

Ignorance ^ on full display: that’s our DumbPoo.

 

[Mac1958]

If Mark Levin says so, it must be true

MAGA media only speaks Da Troof, ya know.

Always honest, always the whole story.

 

[rightwinger]

Not because he says so, stupid child.

But because what he says is well considered and accurate.

You wouldn’t understand.

You mean saying unbiased things like this…

patriotic juror who will refuse to participate in this Stalinist-Biden sham of all shams,

 

[BackAgain]

His biases toward the corrupt prosection have been a huge fundraising benefit for his daughter. He will be hailed as a hero of the left.

His biases were made clear. He still chose not to recuse himself. And the result, as expected, was a terribly unfair trial against President Trump.

 

[Cassandro]

If Mark Levin says so, it must be true

If YOU say so, it must be false.

 

[BackAgain]

MAGA media only speaks Da Troof, ya know.

Always honest, always the whole story.

When Mac1958 has nothing of value to offer, he posts.

The liberal media wouldn’t post the truth about this canard of a trial if their lives depended on it.

And they haven’t.

 

[BackAgain]

You mean saying unbiased things like this…

patriotic juror who will refuse to participate in this Stalinist-Biden sham of all shams,

That’s not “bias” you complete hack.

 

[Rawley]

This quote is from the genius, Mark Levin. Truth Social

I previously tried posting it in “politics” (since it remains my contention that the Bragg persecution is political in the manner of an old Soviet show trial), but it got immediately shuttered there upon a couple of alleged grounds.

To rectify that, I altered the thread title and I am adding my own commentary (even though Levin’s words speak for themselves). I also now place it in the legal forum even though I consider that ironic.

It is indeed appalling that any judge would deny any defendant the right to call relevant witnesses. If the Elected NY County persecutor (Bragg) wants to present a case based on deliberately unstated “other” crimes while hinting that the “other” crime “may” involve a collation of an election law, it is absolutely clear that a defendant should be permitted to demonstrate his actual innocence of that “other” (maybe) “crime.”

But hack Merchan would have no part of that.

Why not?

Doubt we've ever seen or will ever see such a blatantly partisan judge.

 

[BackAgain]

Doubt we've ever seen or will ever see such a blatantly partisan judge.

I sure hope we never do again.

 

[Rawley]

MAGA media only speaks Da Troof, ya know.

Always honest, always the whole story.

So what is your Bidenista media saying about Merchan?

 

[Hollie]

Doubt we've ever seen or will ever see such a blatantly partisan judge.

The suggestion of a conflict of interest with a partisan judge whose daughter is fundraising off of the trial should have been enough for Merchan to recuse himself.

Obviously, not enough integrity.

Redirect Notice

 

[rightwinger]

That’s not “bias” you complete hack.

See, your problem is when you try to offer Mark Levin as an impartial evaluator of the proceedings and he uses terms like ……..”Stalinist-Biden sham”

Kind of tips off the reader

 

[BlindBoo]

Ignorance ^ on full display: that’s our DumbPoo.

Levin is def. a contender for Rushes title of most Bias pundant.