In a blatant display of biased judicial overreach, Acting Justice Juan Merchan has illegitimately prevented Bradley A. Smith, a former Commissioner of the Federal Election Commission, from providing expert testimony in the trial against former President Donald Trump.
Justice Juan Merchan's decision to exclude Smith's testimony is deeply troubling.
Bradley Smith's testimony is crucial for providing the jury with a comprehensive understanding of the Federal Election Campaign Act.
Smith himself highlighted the complexity of the law, quoting the late Justice Antonin Scalia: "This law is so intricate that I can't figure it out." Smith was prepared to elucidate the technicalities of the FECA, ensuring that the jury could accurately interpret the relevant legal standards.
Smith remarked, "Judge Merchan has so restricted my testimony that defense has decided not to call me. Now, it's elementary that the judge instructs the jury on the law, so I understand his reluctance. But the Federal Election Campaign Act is very complex." His expertise would have been invaluable in explaining the intricacies of campaign finance law, much like a technical expert in a product liability case.
Despite the importance of Smith's testimony, Judge Merchan allowed Michael Cohen, a known adversary of Trump, to provide extensive testimony on how his activities allegedly violated the FECA. Smith pointed out the inconsistency, saying, "While the judge wouldn't let me testify on the meaning of law, he allowed Michael Cohen to go on at length about whether and how his activity violated FECA. So effectively, the jury got its instructions on FECA from Michael Cohen!".
Smith succinctly encapsulated the situation: "So you've got a judge who contributed to Trump's opponent presiding over a trial by a prosecutor who was elected on a vow to get Trump, for something DOJ and FEC chose not to prosecute, on a far-fetched legal theory."
No comments:
Post a Comment