Acting NY Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan Is a Political Hangman Deployed by an Appointment Within a Carve-Out
Although Merchan’s appointment may not be in violation of any particular law or procedure given the information publicly available, the net effect is that an un-elected and “acting” in a carve-out.
To pull the veil down on Alvin Bragg’s fraudulent case and ultimate conviction on all 34 counts against former President Donald J. Trump reveals the ugly and complex face of operational lawfare by the Intelligence Community. Deciphering the legal aspects can be a bit challenging; however, once several basic fundamentals are understood, the picture becomes a clear one. Let’s examine those fundamentals through the appropriate lenses.
After reading the indictment, on 02 Jun 24 and following Trump’s conviction, I reached out to Attorney Stephen Joncus, who represents our team in our COVID-19 federal grand jury petition litigation against federal officials.
The question I asked for clarity in understanding the parameters of the case was: “The indictment threads “intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof” throughout. If I am understanding the argument correctly, it’s that Bragg never identified what “another crime” was because it doesn’t exist. Doesn’t that single fact destroy the entire case regardless of all of the other egregious anomalies, such as refusing to sequester the jury or provide written jury instructions for 34 counts?
As it turns out, that’s the exact crux of the case.
In its most basic form, Bragg prosecuted a federal matter under state jurisdiction by constructing a pathway to it meaning his court’s jurisdiction is in question.
From my second article on Trump’s conviction, recall what CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig clearly positioned in stating that, “we had a state court here, a state prosecutor, enforcing in part a federal election crime for the first time actually in U.S. history.”
“First time actually in U.S. history” translates to an enormous red flag indicating a deviation from hundreds of years of standard legal procedure.
Deviation from standard procedure and “changes” to laws and rules is the basic operational platform for how this rigged system is fueled by enterprise fraud.
Consider this as but one example: The Stolen 2022 Midterms Provided the Illusion of Voting Just Like the Election Results Provide the Illusion of Change [following image is from the linked article].
Bragg also laundered the constructed crimes into felonies by leveraging the operational construct that is the basis of the question meaning that unless Bragg attaches “another crime” to the charged crimes of falsifying business records as legal expenses, there are no felony charges.
If there are no felony charges, the political narrative can’t be achieved according to pre-conviction political polling which conflicts with post-conviction polling.
Here is what I mean in this reporting from NBC on 05 Feb 24: “In a close presidential race, a significant number of American voters would be reluctant to elect a convicted felon to the nation’s highest office. If Trump is found guilty, this survey suggests it would make the difference between a Biden defeat and a Biden victory.”
The system is rigged, elections are rigged, the courts are rigged and so is political polling.
Consider the designed polls of 2016 that were destroyed by Hillary Clinton’s unexpected loss as one example.
In the case here, “convicted felon” was a polling point prior to conviction and more importantly, it was established as pretext to which they will point backwards after stealing 2024 whether the polling data was accurate or manufactured as it normally is in falling victim to severe manipulation and extreme Left bias.
To that point, this is from March 2023:
Immediately following Trump’s conviction I wrote this in earlier analysis:
The pretext political polling becomes Trump’s noose: “this survey suggests it would make the difference between a Biden defeat and a Biden victory.”
The post-conviction polling data comes from the Intelligencer:
I&I–TIPP poll conducted partly after verdict finds two-point swing to Trump: “So did Trump’s guilty verdict change minds, weakening his support? On the contrary, it seems. In the head-to-head poll between President Joe Biden and Trump, it’s now a statistical toss-up, 41% to 41%. But that’s an improvement for Trump from May, when he trailed Biden by 2 percentage points in that month’s I&I/TIPP poll (42% Biden to 40% Trump). The June poll has a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percentage points.”
CBS News–YouGov recontact poll finds little shift in opinion: “Overall, opinions of the verdict are in line with what views of Trump’s guilt or innocence were before the verdict was reached.”
ABC News–Ipsos poll finds mostly even split in opinion of verdict/trial, except among “double haters”: “A plurality of Americans, 50%, think [Trump’s guilty verdict] was correct, a new ABC News/Ipsos poll finds, and almost as many, 49%, think he should end his 2024 presidential campaign over the result.”
Possible insights from YouGov’s post-verdict snap poll: “Nearly 80% of Americans say the conviction hasn’t changed their minds about the presidential election: Either they were already opposed to Trump and still are (46%), or they were already supporting Trump and still do (32%). Another 13% aren’t sure. But some voters said the verdict did change their minds. 3% of U.S. adults say they weren’t planning on voting for Trump but are after the conviction. 5% say they were previously planning on voting for Trump but now are not.”
A Morning Consult poll finds majority approval of the verdict: “The Morning Consult survey on Friday found that 54 percent of voters approved (“strongly” or “somewhat”) of the verdict and that Trump committed a crime. In addition, 15 percent of Republican voters, 8 percent of Trump supporters, and 49 percent of independents thought he should end his presidential bid.”
A Reuters-Ipsos poll indicates some Republicans and independents are less likely to vote for Trump: “A two-day national Reuters-Ipsos poll, conducted online after Trump’s guilty verdict, found that one in ten registered Republican voters were less likely to vote for Trump following his conviction, and one in four independent voters were less likely to support him as well.”
“Elections” and political polls are the same in the most important way: Whomever is doing the counting and math is far more important than anyone casting a “vote” or responding to a question.
The NBC piece containing several other polling data sets went on to say, “The typical response to analyses like these is that the shifts in public attitudes are relatively small. That’s true, but in a competitive race, it wouldn’t take much for the felony conviction for the GOP nominee to tip the scales in the incumbent’s favor.”
That’s the subtle nuance in “less is more fashion” where stealing an election equates to casting just enough shadow to swing the vote to desired ends without turning daytime into night.
In short, political polls are the primary mechanism to establish political pretext whether it be authentic or fraudulent.
The game plan’s sequence is elementary:
Publish fraudulent polling data with a particular political narrative.
Construct a fraudulent case around that narrative.
Prosecute the case and cement the established narrative.
Leverage the narrative to influence [steal] the election.
Point backwards at the post-conviction narrative [“We told you this was going to happen”].
In recent reporting from The Gateway Pundit, Yale Law Professor Jed Rubenfeld laid-out the particulars of the fraudulent Bragg prosecution to say:
“Lots of people believe, as the prosecution said, that no, those were hush money campaign expenses, not legal expenses, so they were false. Okay, that’s step one, because Trump was not charged only with falsification of a business record. He was charged with falsifying a business record to conceal a second crime that he had already committed. That’s how the charges become felony charges.”
“The question is, what second crime is the state saying that he was trying to conceal through these allegedly false business records? So, it’s a two-step crime: falsifying business records in order to conceal a second crime that he had already committed.
So, what was the second crime? Well, that’s where things get tricky because the indictment didn’t say. The indictment said that he falsified business records to conceal a second crime, but it never said what the second crime was. And to this day, a lot of people are unsure what the jury thought because what the state did was it did not commit itself to what the second crime might be.”
Rubenfeld went on to lay-out a probable appeal strategy from Trump to get the fraudulent conviction overturned before the 2024 election in three domains: selective prosecution, defective indictment and unanimity of the jury.
Rubenfeld laid-out a second and more nuanced probable appeal strategy: “They could sue in federal court and ask for an emergency, temporary restraining order. Restraining order of what? Well, let me tell you something that you might not know. You’ve probably been reading in the press if you’ve been reading about this case, that Trump is already a convicted felon. The jury has convicted him. He’s a convicted felon. Well, guess what? That’s not true.”
Relative to that and with Trump’s sentencing scheduled for 11 Jul 24, Rubenfeld issued another nuanced reminder: “You’re not a convicted felon because of a jury verdict; you’re not convicted unless the judge enters a judgment of guilt against you. The judge still has the power, as I told you before, to throw out that verdict and enter a judgment of acquittal.”
Unfortunately, the second strategy is a dead end due to factual circumstances: Judge Juan Merchan is a Colombian immigrant from Bogota who is an “acting state Supreme Court justice” in the State of New York;” not a sitting one, who was first appointed to the bench by longtime Trump adversary Michael Bloomberg.
It appears that much of the background information on Merchan’s appointment has been scrubbed or made difficult to find; this from Balletopedia where Merchan “was appointed to this position in 2009 by Chief Administrative Judge Ann T. Pfau.”
Not coincidentally, Pfau is a Columbia alum just like Obama.
Notable is the alignment of Merchan’s appointment with Barack Obama’s first term and where Merchan is also presiding over Steve Bannon’s trial in New York where state jurisdiction circumvents the pardon granted to Bannon by Trump in 2020.
Recall that we have seen the same judge rigging before going as far back as 2014 with detestable and corrupt Emmet Sullivan, who presided over several notable matters: 1-habeus corups cases involving Guantanamo Bay and 9/11, 2-Lois Lerner’s IRS/email scandal [Judicial Watch v. IRS], 3-Hillary Clinton’s FOIA case over her private server email crimes while serving as Secretary of State, 4-Lt. General Michael Flynn’s trial [US v. Flynn] where Sullivan peculiarly obtained his own counsel to represent himself and 5-Blumenthal v. Trump, which centered on foreign payments to Trump hotels.
Like Sullivan, Merchan is a fixer and a hangman inside a completely rigged system.
According to the State of New York court system, “the Supreme Court is broken into twelve judicial districts state-wide. Justices of the Supreme Court are elected to serve 14-year terms.”
Stringing through the NY Courts System website the page for Manhattan’s Criminal Term, we note that the court system makes a distinction between its Courtroom Directory and Judicial Personnel.
Merchan is listed under personnel and not the directory presumably because his appointment to the Manhattan Supreme Court Criminal Term is as an “acting” judge.
The organization of New York’s court system is as follows with Merchan’s appointment is in the criminal division [bottom]:
Notably, the hierarchy of the NY State court system situates the Supreme Court beneath the Court of Appeals.
“Under New York’s Constitution, the Commission on Judicial Nomination is charged with evaluating, and then recommending to the Governor, candidates to fill vacancies on the State’s highest court, the Court of Appeals of the State of New York” [Source].
Therefore and without deviation from the standard, Merchan should have been nominated by the Commission and then confirmed by the NY Senate.
According to New York state law, Supreme Court nominees must be confirmed by the State Senate and in 2009, Merchan was confirmed for the “Court of Claims” but not for the Supreme Court.
This may be one explanation as to why there is no record of any Senate confirmation for Merchan after exhaustive searches in the NY Senate and NY Courts systems and via the internet in general: “Under the New York State Constitution and Judiciary Law, the Governor has the authority to appoint Justices to each Appellate Division from among those who have been elected as Justices of the Supreme Court. These appointments are not subject to Senate confirmation” [Souce].
It remains unclear; however, because Merchan’s “appointment” was made by and administrative judge in Pfau.
Although Merchan’s appointment may not be in violation of any particular law or procedure given the information publicly available, the net effect is that an un-elected and “acting” Supreme Court Justice who was appointed outside of the normal protocol and who possesses broad jurisdiction in felony criminal matters equates to a carve-out for a political hangman and that’s precisely what Merchan is.
The pretext on Merchan was putrid and in hindsight, he was exactly what they said he wasn’t; this from NBC: “”He’s a serious jurist, smart and even tempered,” said Ron Kuby, a longtime defense lawyer in Manhattan. “He’s not one of those judges who yells at lawyers, and is characterized as a no-nonsense judge. But he’s always in control of the courtroom.””
The entire case over which Merchan presided, his unwritten jury instructions for 34 counts and his failure to sequester the jury are all nonsense at the same time he repeatedly yelled and exceeded the bounds of acceptable conduct for a presiding judge:
‘This is not a conversation’: Read heated exchange between Judge Merchan, Robert Costello
Merchan: “Are you staring me down?”
Placing all of the above considerations aside, Merchan’s highly problematic background is further compromised when considering his daughter’s relationship to the case, her clientele and the means by which the Merchan family stands to reap a financial windfall from Judge Merchan’s fraudulent prosecution of Trump: Stefanik Files Judicial Complaint Against Acting Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan.
Tip your hat to these Marxists – not only do they know how to overthrow, enslave, persecute and prosecute, but they know how to get rich doing it.
Juan Merchan is a political hangman and if the rule of law is ever applied with fidelity and in accordance with actual justice relative to treason for subverting New York’s judicial system to interfere in a presidential election for the express purpose of eliminating the candidate who has already won 2024, perhaps Merchan may find himself looking a hangman in the eye.
Since early January 2020, I’ve repeated ad nauseam that THESE PEOPLE WILL NEVER STOP UNTIL THEY ARE MADE TO STOP.
That is because they are quite literally all-in on treason, overthrow and the conversion to Marxist communism where stopping equates to the death penalty.
Merchan is THESE PEOPLE and he’s all-in.
-End-
I have to agree with your thesis.
Given the latest revelation of a possible mistrial per Merchan's own notice to both parties, I have to wonder why?
It seems that this is plausibly merely someone trolling the judicial system (self-identified $h! tposter).
Given the flimsy nature of this post, I wonder if releasing this information without prior, clear investigation, is merely a smokescreen for some other flaw?
I have also heard this could allow discovery from investigation into ALL the jurors activies and possible communication disclosures. I cannot see
how this serves Merchan's obvious end goals.
The problem with the "news" is that they spread lies and propaganda per the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012. "News" is not news, it is scewed at best (limited hangout) and at it's worst it is outright lies.
Your work is still solid.