Trump Trial Judge Missteps – Case Dismissed?

In an appearance on “Fox & Friends,” Turley implied that New York Judge Juan Merchan erred in permitting Bragg’s prosecution team, headed by a former official of the Biden administration named Michael Colangelo, to categorically state that Trump was implicated in violations of federal election law.

Turley said to Fox News, “I got to tell you, I think this judge may have already committed a reversible error. There are federal election crimes here, clearly indicating that the payment to Stormy Daniels did violate federal election rules. He could try to revise it, he could try to change it in his instructions. That is simply untrue.”

The Daily Caller:

“In a 4-3 ruling on Thursday, the New York Court of Appeals determined that the judge overseeing the rape trial of famous Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein had made “egregious mistakes” by “erroneously admitting” testimony regarding unrelated occurrences and other activities, necessitating a new trial. Earlier in his speech, Turley also gave a preview of evidence by Michael Cohen, the former Trump attorney, who is anticipated to be a key witness for the prosecution.”

“That jury will hear Michael Cohen say, ‘Please put my client to jail for following my legal advice.'” Turley went on. “He organized and set up everything they were discussing, telling his client that ‘we could accomplish this.'” It is a strange time.

Gregg Jarrett, a legal commentator for Fox News, also used the overturning of Weinstein’s conviction as precedent for the possible overturning of Trump’s sentence.

Last week’s court session did not address any of the real charges. “Since none of the witnesses truly testified to any significant offense recognized by law,” Jarrett told co-host Steve Doocy of “Fox & Friends.” Rather, Steve, it was more akin to this strange theater of the ridiculous or kabuki. David Pecker, the head of the National Enquirer, spent the bulk of the week testifying in court and confirming what we already knew. The tabloid was shady; it killed and promoted articles.

But it is not illegal, Steve. It is not illegal to compensate someone for their silence. Moreover, influencing an election is not illegal. According to Jarrett, campaigns have a goal. Nevertheless, in court, Alvin Bragg’s legal henchmen frequently use the terms “fraud” and “conspiracy.” Justice Neil Gorsuch of the Supreme Court warned about this hairbrain prosecution last week during the immunity hearing, despite Trump’s lack of any accusations.

“This judge is admitting that kind of evidence, even though it was the introduction of comparable criminal conduct that caused the reversal of Harvey Weinstein’s sex crime prosecutions,” Jarrett went on. “The most absurd aspect of this case is Bragg’s allegation that Trump fabricated personal financial documents in order to sway an election.”

But notice the indictment: following the 2016 election, all of the alleged accounting crimes occurred in 2017. It is a really clever strategy to sway an election after it has already happened.”