New York City’s Attorney General Bragg’s trial of Donald trump before Judge Merchan continues to cause deep consternation among America’s legal profession, especially the judge’s distinctly un-Constitutional directions to the jury.

There’s a possibility that Merchan’s conduct will result in a gross miscarriage of justice, with consequential appeal by Donald Trump to the nation’s Supreme Court.

As above, TGP’s Christina Laila citation is of Jeff Clark, whose ‘X’ account describes him as ‘former US DOJ Double Ass’t AG, Admin. Law Aficionado’.

Her MUST READ ‘Breaking News’ of yesterday examines judge Merchan’s instruction to the jury to choose from three crimes upon which to convict Trump. The whole tenor of the DA’s investigation and the judges’ refusal to be recused in view of deep personal animosity and family financial connections with Democrat party proves the whole process is a flagrant political witch-hunt and repeated deliberate interference – for a second time – with an upcoming presidential election.

Thus, a possible appeal to SCOTUS would align with prophecies of Wanda Alger and Charlie Shamp of that body’s role in not only the 2020 but also the 2024 election being judicially ruled upon in the Supreme Court of the United States!!

Here’s extracts from Professor Jonathan Turley’s latest MUST-READ posting on what he, not a Trump supporter, describes as flagrant “manufactured criminal theory” :

(Emphases mine) ‘…The instructions in the case raised concerns that the deliberations could become a legal version of a canned hunt, where the prey is trapped in a cage or fenced in areas to be dispatched. Elements of the instructions are disturbing in reducing what is required to convict the former president.

‘…Before jurors left, however, Judge Juan Merchan framed their deliberations in a way that seemed less like a jury deliberation than a canned hunt. 

For many of us, the Trump trial has seemed otherworldly, a vaguely familiar proceeding where common elements of a trial seem to have been flipped.

Even before the jury instructions, the trial was controversial for both liberal and conservative commentators. At the start of closing arguments, most honest observers were still wondering what the prosecutors were alleging as to the crime that Trump was allegedly concealing with the falsification of business records.’

‘…(in closing arguments) In New York, the defense must go first, giving the government free rein over its closing with no risk of contradiction from the defense. With the exception of objections, any abusive or improper arguments are left to the judge to address.

In the case of Judge Merchan, that protection was all but absent as the prosecution engaged in flagrant violations from offering testimony on unestablished facts to directly contradicting prior instructions. In one of the most egregious moments, Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass told the jury that it is an established fact that former Trump counsel Michael Cohen committed a federal election law violation on the direct orders of Donald Trump. Merchan had repeatedly said that Cohen’s earlier plea could not be used to imply the guilt of Trump. Merchan overruled an objection and Steinglass proceeded, as he did earlier in trial, to repeat the false statement…’

‘So going into the deliberations, the court allowed the jury to be told repeatedly that there were federal campaign violations committed by Trump. That is not true.Putting aside that the federal government found no basis to impose a civil fine, let alone bring a criminal charge, the court barred a legal expert who could have shown that no such violation occurred. The jury does not know that. Instead, the judge allowed them to be repeatedly told a false fact that could make it difficult for anyone to acquit….‘

‘Consider just a few highlights from the curious aspects of these deliberations.

First, the judge has ruled that the jury does not have to agree on what actually occurred in the case. Merchan ruled that the government had vaguely referenced three possible crimes that constitute the “unlawful means” used to influence the election: a federal election violation, the falsification of business records, and a tax violation. The jurors were told that they could split on what occurred, with four jurors accepting each of the three possible crimes in a 4-4-4 split. The court would still consider that a unanimous verdict so long as they agree that it was in furtherance of some crime. [RB: BUT WHAT CRIME???]

Second, the judge said that he would instruct the jury on the law but then omitted the key elements that established there was no federal campaign violation. Indeed, the blocked legal expert…former chair of the Federal Election Commission, was going to testify that this could not have been a federal election violation...’

‘Third, not only can the jury disagree as to what occurred, but one of the three crimes is so circular as to produce vertigo in the jury room. The prosecutors zapped a dead misdemeanor back into life by claiming a violation under New York’s election law 17-152….’

‘Finally, Merchan is allowing conviction based on a  “general intent” to defraud “any person or entity,” a dangerously vague concept in this novel criminal case. (He) has largely stuck to the standard jury instructions, but this case is anything but standard…’

Professor Turley begins his conclusion:

‘Given the instructions and the errors in this trial, it would seem that an acquittal is almost beyond the realm of possibility. That leaves either a hung jury or a conviction. However, the framing of this case and failure to protect the rights of the defendant have undermined the perceived legitimacy of the proceedings and any possible verdict…’

After the jury reconvened this morning Paul Ingrassia of The Gateway Pundit writes,

“This is a flagrant violation of due process because it violates the principle of jury unanimity. As @JeffClarkUS rightly pointed out on here a few days ago: “Merchan needs to acquaint himself with Ramos v. Louisiana from the U.S. Supreme Court,” which spells out these principles clearly and concisely — two words that were evidently lost in translation on Merchan when he migrated to the United States from Colombia”.