No Change Of Venue? Trump/Judge Merchan Case Stench Just Got Worse
Print Friendly and PDF

In a display of arrogance increasingly typical of the flawed New York Judiciary, Newsweek reported Donald Trump’s Appeal Brutally Shot Down by Judge in One Sentence [by Giulia Carbonaro, April 9, 2024].

The Judge, Hispanic activist Lisbeth Gonzalez, was clearly focused on expediting the lynching process.

The matter Trump raised is far more serious than this silly trial, and affects anyone remotely on the Right against whom some allegation can be cooked up. Reuters more professionally reports:

Emil Bove, a lawyer for Trump, said … his client was seeking to stay the case pending the application to move the trial … Bove said a survey taken by Trump’s legal team of residents in heavily Democratic Manhattan, one of New York City’s five boroughs, found that 61% of respondents thought Trump was guilty, and 70% had a negative opinion of him.

New York City voted 76.2% for Biden in 2020—the Manhattan Biden vote was 86.4%.

I do not understand why the practice of moving the venue of a trial from an obviously severely prejudiced area has been abandoned. The same applies to the January 6 victims in DC (92.15% Biden in 2020).

For non-liberals these jurisdictions are simply the Place de la Revolution in the French Revolution: the location of the Guillotine.

I remarked in Why Should Colombian-Born Judge Merchan Be Expected To Respect Anglo-Saxon Judicial Ethics? In this trial:

Until my hypothesis Does James/Engoron Gang Plan To Loot Trump’s Companies The Way Leftist Hero Judge Bazelon Plundered Japanese-Americans?  is proven, the leading for old-fashioned corruption motives is Colombian-born Judge Juan Merchan.

That the New York Judiciary allowed Judge Merchan to stay on this case is informative.

I quoted from Joseph Fried:

Recusal is not just a matter of ethics: It is a constitutional requirement.

According to the Cornell Law School.

“The Due Process clauses of the United States Constitution require judges to recuse themselves from cases in two situations:

    1. Where the judge has a financial interest in the case’s outcome.
    2. Where there is otherwise a strong possibility that the judge’s decision will be biased.

In either case, it does not matter whether or not the judge is actually biased. What matters is that even if the judge is not biased, the high probability of bias still damages the integrity of the judicial system. Any party in a lawsuit may request that a judge recuse him or herself.”

If a judge knowingly ignores these recusal requirements, he or she is flagrantly depriving the defendant or litigant of his or her constitutional rights. To me, that makes the judge a criminal… has had all too many corroborative experiences with the New York Courts, although we have never been charged. 

Please spare us a thought:

VDARE’s credit card processing is still suspended. We can take snail mail checks & e-checks (Process Green E-Debit (

This the easiest electronic way to help save VDARE:

Print Friendly and PDF