berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 25,102
- 21,103
- 2,320
Dotard has pressed the case of Merchan's bias endlessly. It has been factually, and therefore summarily, dismissed.
Finally, Defendant alleges, again, that public confidence is fatally impaired by this Court's alleged "disqualifying conflict." Defendant's Motion at pg. 65. And while Defendant "recognize(s), without conceding," the prior rulings of this Court rejecting such a claim, he pursues it once again. That Defendant does not acknowledge is that he has made three applications to the Appellate Division challenging this Court's rejection of Defendant's motions for recusal, which have all been rejected. Further, Defendant is reminded that very early in these proceedings, this Court sought an opinion from the Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics, regarding the very issues contained in Defendant's subsequent motions for recusal and which he now raises again. The Committee rendered an opinion on May 4, 2023, Finding that "the judge's impartiality cannot reasonably be questioned based on the judge's relative's business and or political activities" and further advising that there was no requirement that this Court recuse from the proceedings. The Opinion of the Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics, Op.23-54 May 4, 2023). Despite the Opinion, of which Defendant has been aware for over one year, and the repeated Decisions of the Appellate Division, Defendant continues to mount the same baseless attacks in each succeeding motion, albeit with increasing ire. The frequency of the claims and escalating rhetoric in each subsequent motion - does not render the claims true or valid. They are not and it is irresponsible and deeply concerning for counsel to insist on advancing these claims. To be clear, this is not the only example of Defendant pursuing a claim with increasing indignation while simultaneously failing to acknowledge that this Court's rulings on those subjects have been repeatedly upheld. By way of illustration, Defendant's motion papers refer to the "unconstitutional Continuation of The Gag Order" as an example of this Court's alleged conflicted status. As noted supra, as recently as December 9,2024, the United States Supreme Court denied an application for a stay regarding that Order Good l-.awgic, ILC, el al u. Merchan, a denial following repeated rejections of this claim in lower courts. See Part VIII (d). It is therefore bewildering to this Court that Defendant continues to file such papers.
https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFs/press/PDFs/People v. DJT Clayton Decision.pdf
The reason trump fails to have the kind of success in courts of law that he enjoys with The Following is the court rarely bends to his bullshit.
Finally, Defendant alleges, again, that public confidence is fatally impaired by this Court's alleged "disqualifying conflict." Defendant's Motion at pg. 65. And while Defendant "recognize(s), without conceding," the prior rulings of this Court rejecting such a claim, he pursues it once again. That Defendant does not acknowledge is that he has made three applications to the Appellate Division challenging this Court's rejection of Defendant's motions for recusal, which have all been rejected. Further, Defendant is reminded that very early in these proceedings, this Court sought an opinion from the Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics, regarding the very issues contained in Defendant's subsequent motions for recusal and which he now raises again. The Committee rendered an opinion on May 4, 2023, Finding that "the judge's impartiality cannot reasonably be questioned based on the judge's relative's business and or political activities" and further advising that there was no requirement that this Court recuse from the proceedings. The Opinion of the Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics, Op.23-54 May 4, 2023). Despite the Opinion, of which Defendant has been aware for over one year, and the repeated Decisions of the Appellate Division, Defendant continues to mount the same baseless attacks in each succeeding motion, albeit with increasing ire. The frequency of the claims and escalating rhetoric in each subsequent motion - does not render the claims true or valid. They are not and it is irresponsible and deeply concerning for counsel to insist on advancing these claims. To be clear, this is not the only example of Defendant pursuing a claim with increasing indignation while simultaneously failing to acknowledge that this Court's rulings on those subjects have been repeatedly upheld. By way of illustration, Defendant's motion papers refer to the "unconstitutional Continuation of The Gag Order" as an example of this Court's alleged conflicted status. As noted supra, as recently as December 9,2024, the United States Supreme Court denied an application for a stay regarding that Order Good l-.awgic, ILC, el al u. Merchan, a denial following repeated rejections of this claim in lower courts. See Part VIII (d). It is therefore bewildering to this Court that Defendant continues to file such papers.
https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFs/press/PDFs/People v. DJT Clayton Decision.pdf
The reason trump fails to have the kind of success in courts of law that he enjoys with The Following is the court rarely bends to his bullshit.
Last edited:
