Staff Reports
Former President Donald Trump is heading towards sentencing on September 18, following his controversial conviction for allegedly falsifying business records, an event that has spawned all sorts of political theatrics. In a move that is as predictable as rain in Seattle, Missouri’s Republican Attorney General, Andrew Bailey, attempted to get Trump’s sentencing delayed until after the November elections, only to face a wall of judicial indifference. Apparently, the Supreme Court was too busy to entertain what many would consider a legitimate request to keep the election process transparent and fair.
Bailey’s lawsuit against New York—a state known for its love affair with all things progressive—claims that the radical left is attempting to sabotage the upcoming election by throwing a spanner in the works of Trump’s campaign. The lawsuit emphatically asserts that voters in Missouri, and indeed across the nation, have the right to hear from their preferred candidate without interference from a biased judicial system. It’s a classic case of “let the voters decide,” something that the left seems all too eager to circumvent.
Check out this article: Supreme Court Rejects Request to Push Trump’s Sentencing Past Election – https://t.co/EqCTddphxQ out this article: Supreme Court Rejects Request to Push Trump’s Sentencing Past Election – https://t.co/bLLU9VBFqa
— Louise B Eisenhardt (@LouiseBEisenha2) August 7, 2024
Joining Bailey in this uphill battle against the New York machine are attorney generals from Florida, Iowa, Montana, and Alaska. One could say they’re forming a red-state coalition—ready to ride in on a wave of rational thought against the sea of leftist lunacy. They submitted a brief in support of Bailey’s argument, pointing out the inherent risk to democracy when a candidate’s ability to campaign is compromised by political maneuvers disguised as judicial processes.
As the legal gloves come off, Trump’s legal team is also crying foul by requesting that Judge Juan Merchan recuse himself from the case. And why? Because Merchan’s daughter has ties to the political world, specifically through her work with a certain Democratic political consultant. In an idyllic scenario where justice is blind, one would hope that personal connections wouldn’t sway a judge’s decisions, but with such glaring connections, it’s understandable that the defense team wants to ensure a fair trial—one that isn’t influenced by campaign cash flowing in from Trump’s opponents.
The icing on the cake? Merchan’s daughter has been doing quite well for herself, reportedly raking in over $93 million for Democratic candidates and causes tied to her employer, a firm that has offered its services to some of the party’s biggest names including President Biden and Rep. Adam Schiff. If that’s not a conflict of interest, it’s hard to know what is. It seems that while one side plays the game by the book, the other is busy rewriting the rules while profiting off the fallout—something that should raise eyebrows, regardless of political affiliation.
