‘Gray and Hazy Evidence’: Tolman on Judge Merchan’s Impartiality in Tump’s N.Y. Trial

RUSH TRANSCRIPT:
BAIER: “You know, a lot about this judge and to the former president’s point he is still under that gag order until it’s officially relieved. Ellie who wrote this prosecutors Trump but they contorted the law. The judge donated money to a pro-Biden anti-Trump political operation including funds that the judge earmarked for resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy with folks have been just fine if the folks had stayed on the case to re-elect Donald Trump MAGA forever. Absolutely not. This is the section of the rule in New York. Section 100.5. Rules for the chief administrative judge. A judge or candidate for elective judicial office shall refrain from inappropriate political activity. Prohibited political activity shall include soliciting funds for, pays an assessment to or making a contribution to a political organization or candidate: so I start with you, you know, supporters of the judge and the verdict say hey, it was 35 bucks. What’s the big deal? What do you say about all of that?”
TOLMAN: “Yeah, Bret, you know, there was a time in which judges really bent over backwards to make sure that the public had a perception of fairness. And a perception of impartiality. And I know judges that for far less will recuse themselves in order to give some confidence to the public. We don’t see that in this case. Instead, we have some gray and hazy evidence that he received the case, perhaps on purpose. We also don’t know why he didn’t take the higher road and give confidence. I mean, imagine how different it would be, Bret, if the judge recused a new judge with very little, you know, conflict or no conflict, took over, that there was a presumption of innocence and that the defense was given far greater latitude to defend themselves, and at that point, if a conviction occurs, you have a lot more confidence that the system at least worked the way that it was supposed to work. Here, we lose confidence from the very beginning of this case, from the charging, and the grand jury to the jury instructions and conviction.”