Why the DOJ Should Investigate Judge Juan Merchan Next

[busybee01]

Marlow: Investigation Season—Why the DOJ Should Investigate Judge Juan Merchan Next

Judge Juan Merchan presided over the most blatantly partisan of all the lawfare cases against Trump that I documented in my book “Breaking the Law.”

www.breitbart.com

"Violation of the Fifth and Sixth Amendment Rights ​

The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution demands that a defendant “be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.”

As I explain in Breaking the Law, D.A. Alvin Bragg had to piggyback Trump’s supposed falsifying business records crime to a secondary crime in order to get it classified as a felony from a misdemeanor. If he failed to do so, the statute of limitations would have run out. (That this was attempted is obvious evidence that this was a targeted political prosecution.)

The second crime finally came to light during the jury instructions.

According to the court, Donald Trump attempted to influence an election by “unlawful means.” What were the unlawful means? Well, nobody ever specified. Instead of solving the unnamed crime issue, this only made it worse. The charge introduced a third (!) mystery crime piggybacking off the second one.

If this is sounding ridiculous, just wait until you hear that the third crime was not specified, ever!

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2025/08/GettyImages-2154683844.jpg
Merchan told the jury that the third crime could be multiple choice. It was a choose-your-own-adventure trial. He informed the jury that if they agreed that Trump falsified business records to influence an election, they no longer had to agree unanimously.

At a constitutional level, the jury verdict needed to be unanimous. But in Merchan’s courtroom, it did not need to be unanimous on the third crime. The jury merely needed to agree that there was a third crime, any crime.

In addition to Trump’s being denied his Sixth Amendment rights to being informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, Merchan was now denying Trump due process rights afforded to him by the Fifth Amendment."



If the judge conspired to deprive Trump of his constitutional rights, then he deserves to be prosecuted. This was a political attack cloaked by a black robe.

The author is the garbage that needs to be prosecuted. This is nothing but fantasy.

 

[DonGlock26]

The author is the garbage that needs to be prosecuted. This is nothing but fantasy.

The appeals should be interesting to say the least.

 

[BackAgain]

You are confusing the events of the crime with the motivation of the crime.

You left out the whole hide Cohen's crime.

Trump feloniously falsified business records to hide Cohen's crime, that was the "event", to unlawfully influence the election was the "motivation" and NO the jury does not have to agree as to motivation, they have to agree on the commission of the crime.
.
.
.
.
Take for example a Husband that murders his wife. The event of the murder has to be proven. The prosecution can then present creditable motives as to why the murder was committed. Such as:

• The husband had huge gambling debts and he wanted the huge insurance policy on his wife.
• or
• The husband found out that the the wife was doing the pool boy.
• or
• Maybe the husband found out that the wife was doing the pool girl.

The jury as to agree 100% that the husband committed the murder. 50% can believe it was for the money, and 50% can believe it was because the wife was shlepping to pool person. Still a valid conviction.

WW

“Motive” in NY is not an element of the crime. Any crime.

As I have suggested on this topic )about the elements which are set forth in the law defining a crime), there is a precedent for it. Specifically, take burglary under NY Penal Law.

Let’s say you’re charged with entering a victim’s home without permission or authority for the purpose of “committing a crime therein.” Not only is it not required that the defendant have succeeded in taking anything at all, but the prosecutor isn’t required to prove what underlying crime the defendant “intended” to commit.

If it is a multiple choice which is presented to the trial jury, I still say that some may say they find the underlying intended crime to have been theft while the rest of the jury may have different conclusions. I foresee a day where even the NY courts have to admit that this means that the jury verdict is NOT unanimous.

It’s even worse in this bullshit Bragg case against Trump, as argued in the OP.

This case might cause the SCOTUS to void the NY law on burglary cases, too.

 

[popscottpopscott]

Merchan's communications should be looked into... and Willis.... and Bragg... and smith, etc. .... and any of the rogue unelected judges, coming out of the woodwork with bogus TRO's, for any coordination between any of them and with the WH should be dealt with....
I don't believe in coincidences that have happened the last 4 + years

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

There are no rogue, unelected Judges.

There are only rogue, unelected citizens, who have a right to their opinion, like popscottpopscott.

And I have a right to tell him that he sounds foolish.

 

[popscottpopscott]

John Edgar Slow Horses

There are no rogue, unelected Judges.

There are only rogue, unelected citizens, who have a right to their opinion, like popscottpopscott.

And I have a right to tell him that he sounds foolish.

These are rogue, unelected Judges that are rogue, unelected citizens, that take an oath...
They have failed to abide by their oath.

The Judicial Oath (required by 28 U.S. Code § 453):

"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [office] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The abide by the oath just fine.

Stop sounding goofy.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Nope.

Yep.

Cohen’s crime for which he was eventually convicted.

Illegal campaign fraud under New York law in connection with Pecker and Cohen.

Tax fraud. (IHHO, the weakest of the three.)

All presented in the Statement of Facts and with supporting evidence send testimony at trial.

WW

 

[Rogue AI]

You are confusing the events of the crime with the motivation of the crime.

You left out the whole hide Cohen's crime.

Trump feloniously falsified business records to hide Cohen's crime, that was the "event", to unlawfully influence the election was the "motivation" and NO the jury does not have to agree as to motivation, they have to agree on the commission of the crime.
.
.
.
.
Take for example a Husband that murders his wife. The event of the murder has to be proven. The prosecution can then present creditable motives as to why the murder was committed. Such as:

• The husband had huge gambling debts and he wanted the huge insurance policy on his wife.
• or
• The husband found out that the the wife was doing the pool boy.
• or
• Maybe the husband found out that the wife was doing the pool girl.

The jury as to agree 100% that the husband committed the murder. 50% can believe it was for the money, and 50% can believe it was because the wife was shlepping to pool person. Still a valid conviction.

WW

Yet nobody can show another NY case using the same criteria used against Trump. That should tell people something. Alas the world is full of idiots.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Yet nobody can show another NY case using the same criteria used against Trump. That should tell people something. Alas the world is full of idiots.

I agree 100%, I'm pretty sure that there has been no case using the same criteria in the past. That criteria being:

• A sitting President running for reelection,
• That sitting President conspires with his private fixer attorney and the CEO/Editor of a major Newspaper to illegally pay for and "catch-n-kill" stories about that President specifically add in the campaign effort.
• The Editor identified multiple stories that were killed, and when his own attorney's find out about it advise him that what he's doing is Federal campaign fraud, so for the case in question the Editor backs out.
• Just a couple of weeks before the election the Editor informs the Fixer Attorney of another story that is in the works.
• This one involes the President (not the President at the time) boinking a porn star while his 3rd wife is at home having just given birth to his son. His 3rd wife BTW who he had an affair with while still married to his 2nd wife. Oh, and his 2nd wife? He had an affair with her will still married to his 1st wife. So said boinking of porn star is totally in character.
• Because the newspaper won't "catch-n-kill" the story, the Fixer Attorney takes out a loan (with questionable paperwork) againstg the equity of his home and pays the $130,000 to the porn star for an NDA to protect the campaign.
• Evidence at trail was that the President knew about the payment and even suggested that the payment be delayed until after the election so they could stiff the porn star and not pay her. First, pun intended. Second, it shows that the PRIMARY motivation was to aid the campaign and not to protect the Presidents reputation or to keep his wife from finding out. If it was to protect the reputation, then there were have been not attempt to delay payment and then not pay allowing the story to come out. It wasn't to protect the wife - as she already knew as the story had already come out years before. The damage to the campaign was the resurgence of the story right before voting.
• So said Fixer Attorney committed Federal campaign fraud by making an illegal and unreported load to the campiagn.
• Said President, the Fixer Attorney, and Executives at the Presidents private business, then conspired to pay the Fixer attorney reimbursement for the illegal campaign loan (legal expenses) and for services rendered (attorney fees) but to launder the payments through the Presidents business by falisifying business records, invoice for a retainer that didn't exist, for services not performed during the invoice period, and to spread the payments out over a year instead of lump sum to further attempt to hide the transactions.
• The scheme of laundering the money through the business entity was specifically to hide the illegal activities of the the Fixer Attorney.
• However, the finances of the Fixer attorney were under investification in an unrelated taxi medallion scheme and so the campaign load was discovered.
• The Fixer attorney was charged with, convicted of, and went to prison for Federal campaign finance fraud. Which led to the investigation into how the Fixer attorney got paid.
• That resulted in criminal charges against the President for money laundering (technically Felonioius Business Fraud, a felony when done to hide another crime - i.e. Cohen's).
• Because of his own illegal actions up to a piont, the Editor of the newspaper (remember him?) provided testimony at trial about the conspiracy that was hatched including dates, times, locations, and the plan. Testiomony confirmed by others. In exchange he was prosecuted for his part in the illegal activity either by the Feds or NY State.

So , ya, I can't think of any case using the same criteria as used against Trump. Sitting President obtaining an NDA (perfectly legal), but using illegal payment methods to provide the compensation for the transaction all - as shown in court - done specifically as a result of the campaign.

Funny thing is Trump could have done it in a perfectly legal manner by using private funds paid directly, but to hide the transaction for the campaign it was done illegally and it was that payment (not the NDA itself) that resulted in the criminal conviction.

WW

 

[SeaMajor7]

I agree 100%, I'm pretty sure that there has been no case using the same criteria in the past. That criteria being:

• A sitting President running for reelection,
• That sitting President conspires with his private fixer attorney and the CEO/Editor of a major Newspaper to illegally pay for and "catch-n-kill" stories about that President specifically add in the campaign effort.
• The Editor identified multiple stories that were killed, and when his own attorney's find out about it advise him that what he's doing is Federal campaign fraud, so for the case in question the Editor backs out.
• Just a couple of weeks before the election the Editor informs the Fixer Attorney of another story that is in the works.
• This one involes the President (not the President at the time) boinking a porn star while his 3rd wife is at home having just given birth to his son. His 3rd wife BTW who he had an affair with while still married to his 2nd wife. Oh, and his 2nd wife? He had an affair with her will still married to his 1st wife. So said boinking of porn star is totally in character.
• Because the newspaper won't "catch-n-kill" the story, the Fixer Attorney takes out a loan (with questionable paperwork) againstg the equity of his home and pays the $130,000 to the porn star for an NDA to protect the campaign.
• Evidence at trail was that the President knew about the payment and even suggested that the payment be delayed until after the election so they could stiff the porn star and not pay her. First, pun intended. Second, it shows that the PRIMARY motivation was to aid the campaign and not to protect the Presidents reputation or to keep his wife from finding out. If it was to protect the reputation, then there were have been not attempt to delay payment and then not pay allowing the story to come out. It wasn't to protect the wife - as she already knew as the story had already come out years before. The damage to the campaign was the resurgence of the story right before voting.
• So said Fixer Attorney committed Federal campaign fraud by making an illegal and unreported load to the campiagn.
• Said President, the Fixer Attorney, and Executives at the Presidents private business, then conspired to pay the Fixer attorney reimbursement for the illegal campaign loan (legal expenses) and for services rendered (attorney fees) but to launder the payments through the Presidents business by falisifying business records, invoice for a retainer that didn't exist, for services not performed during the invoice period, and to spread the payments out over a year instead of lump sum to further attempt to hide the transactions.
• The scheme of laundering the money through the business entity was specifically to hide the illegal activities of the the Fixer Attorney.
• However, the finances of the Fixer attorney were under investification in an unrelated taxi medallion scheme and so the campaign load was discovered.
• The Fixer attorney was charged with, convicted of, and went to prison for Federal campaign finance fraud. Which led to the investigation into how the Fixer attorney got paid.
• That resulted in criminal charges against the President for money laundering (technically Felonioius Business Fraud, a felony when done to hide another crime - i.e. Cohen's).
• Because of his own illegal actions up to a piont, the Editor of the newspaper (remember him?) provided testimony at trial about the conspiracy that was hatched including dates, times, locations, and the plan. Testiomony confirmed by others. In exchange he was prosecuted for his part in the illegal activity either by the Feds or NY State.

So , ya, I can't think of any case using the same criteria as used against Trump. Sitting President obtaining an NDA (perfectly legal), but using illegal payment methods to provide the compensation for the transaction all - as shown in court - done specifically as a result of the campaign.

Funny thing is Trump could have done it in a perfectly legal manner by using private funds paid directly, but to hide the transaction for the campaign it was done illegally and it was that payment (not the NDA itself) that resulted in the criminal conviction.

WW

Cool NARRATIVES.
Your 34 "indictments" are going to turn into 34 CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.
Let me quote Peter Gabriel.....
"This time you've gone too far.
This time you've gone too far.
This time you've gone too far."

 

[WorldWatcher]

Cool NARRATIVES.
Your 34 "indictments" are going to turn into 34 CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.
Let me quote Peter Gabriel.....
"This time you've gone too far.
This time you've gone too far.
This time you've gone too far."

It's not a civil rights violation for prosecutors to prosecute criminals for criminal activity.

Trump's DOJ revenge "investigation" will go no where but make headlines for a few days.

WW

 

[candycorn]

Marlow: Investigation Season—Why the DOJ Should Investigate Judge Juan Merchan Next

Judge Juan Merchan presided over the most blatantly partisan of all the lawfare cases against Trump that I documented in my book “Breaking the Law.”

www.breitbart.com

"Violation of the Fifth and Sixth Amendment Rights ​

The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution demands that a defendant “be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.”

As I explain in Breaking the Law, D.A. Alvin Bragg had to piggyback Trump’s supposed falsifying business records crime to a secondary crime in order to get it classified as a felony from a misdemeanor. If he failed to do so, the statute of limitations would have run out. (That this was attempted is obvious evidence that this was a targeted political prosecution.)

The second crime finally came to light during the jury instructions.

According to the court, Donald Trump attempted to influence an election by “unlawful means.” What were the unlawful means? Well, nobody ever specified. Instead of solving the unnamed crime issue, this only made it worse. The charge introduced a third (!) mystery crime piggybacking off the second one.

If this is sounding ridiculous, just wait until you hear that the third crime was not specified, ever!

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2025/08/GettyImages-2154683844.jpg
Merchan told the jury that the third crime could be multiple choice. It was a choose-your-own-adventure trial. He informed the jury that if they agreed that Trump falsified business records to influence an election, they no longer had to agree unanimously.

At a constitutional level, the jury verdict needed to be unanimous. But in Merchan’s courtroom, it did not need to be unanimous on the third crime. The jury merely needed to agree that there was a third crime, any crime.

In addition to Trump’s being denied his Sixth Amendment rights to being informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, Merchan was now denying Trump due process rights afforded to him by the Fifth Amendment."



If the judge conspired to deprive Trump of his constitutional rights, then he deserves to be prosecuted. This was a political attack cloaked by a black robe.

I enjoy that to try to draw attention away from his pedophilia...he's bringing up his previous convictions.

The internals for the GOP must be off the charts bad if they are doing this.

Inflation and unemployment are both up....

 

[SeaMajor7]

It's not a civil rights violation for prosecutors to prosecute criminals for criminal activity.

Trump's DOJ revenge "investigation" will go no where but make headlines for a few days.

WW

Turning a benign bookkeeping misdemeanor beyond the statute of limitation into 34 ******* FELONIES is OUTRAGEOUS LAWFARE.
This isn't the SOVIET UNION.
This MUST be delt with under the TRUE color of LAW.
This STALINIST BULLSHIT cannot go unpunished, and MUST NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN in the United States of America.
FAFO BITCHES

 

[DonGlock26]

Yep.

Cohen’s crime for which he was eventually convicted.

Illegal campaign fraud under New York law in connection with Pecker and Cohen.

Tax fraud. (IHHO, the weakest of the three.)

All presented in the Statement of Facts and with supporting evidence send testimony at trial.

WW

Was Trump charged with those two crimes?
Was Trump convicted of those two crimes?

 

[Mac1958]

There are no rogue, unelected Judges.

There are only rogue, unelected citizens, who have a right to their opinion, like popscottpopscott.

And I have a right to tell him that he sounds foolish.

The plan is all about intimidation. Making examples of people. The courts, the press, education, science, jobs reports, CEOs, Congress, government employees, lawyers, you name it.

Say or do the wrong thing, try to hold the boss accountable or happen to make him look bad while just doing your job, and you'll literally have his own personal DOJ coming down on you.

Right in sync with the historical template. Textbook.

The flock, which is just fine with it (retribution 'n stuff), will awkwardly try to equate it with Biden, because that's the conditioning.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Yet nobody can show another NY case using the same criteria used against Trump. That should tell people something. Alas the world is full of idiots.

Don't have to. Don't waste our time.

 

[popscottpopscott]

The abide by the oath just fine.

Stop sounding goofy.

Prove me wrong..

 

[WorldWatcher]

Was Trump charged with those two crimes?
Was Trump convicted of those two crimes?

Trump was charged with felonious falsification of business records, which at the felony level required a condition that the action taken was to hide or aid in another crime.

It does not require that the person committing the felonious action be the person whose crime was attempting to be hidden or aided in.

That crime was Cohen's. And yes Cohen was indicted, was charged, and was convicted in Federal Court. That conviction is/was an established fact the the connection made to Trump as part of the trial.

WW

 

[popscottpopscott]

Yep.

Cohen’s crime for which he was eventually convicted.

Illegal campaign fraud under New York law in connection with Pecker and Cohen.

Tax fraud. (IHHO, the weakest of the three.)

All presented in the Statement of Facts and with supporting evidence send testimony at trial.

WW

Was Trump charged with those two crimes?
Was Trump convicted of those two crimes?

Exactly
Here is the actual indictment WorldWatcher ... please copy and paste the charges of, Illegal campaign fraud under New York law or Tax fraud in the indictment.
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right... to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation..."

The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump

Newly unsealed indictment gives more information about federal charges former President Donald Trump faces.

www.documentcloud.org