Kafka Would Approve
The novel, the “Trial,” by Franz Kafka is a haunting work of literature that follows the story of a man named Joseph K. who is arrested and put on trial for an unknown crime in a nightmarish and absurd legal system. With today’s conclusion of President Trump’s “hush money” trial, I can only imagine that Mr. Kafka would be very pleased.
Without doubt, Kafka would be DELIGHTED by the proceedings:
1: Why, ON EARTH, was Trump not granted a change of venue? Changes of venue are typically granted in circumstances where the defendant can not get a fair trial. In New York City, nearly 70% of voters are Democrats, 28% Republican; in other words, there are 2 and 1/2 Democrats for every Republican. In 2020, presidential voting in Brooklyn, for example, was even more lopsided: 83.4% for Biden vs. 15.9 for Trump; in other words there were 5.2 Democrats for every Republican. Considering these facts and considering the 80 plus MILLION dollar judgement in E. Jean Carrol’s defamation claim against Trump (also tried in Manhattan), in which the jury ruled AGAINST Carol’s claim of rape, but awarded her millions ANYWAY! It should be apparent to all but the most dim witted (or partisan Democrat) that it was impossible for Trump to get a fair trial in the city. Yet NO change of venue was granted.
2: Next, how could Judge Juan Merchan possibly justify his participation in this case when:
A: His daughter, Loren Merchan, is
President of “Authentic
Campaigns” a Democrat
fundraising company that has
made millions from the trial.
B: His wife, Lara Merchan, is
connected to Biden’s corrupt
DOJ, and, at one point,
worked for the the hyper partisan
AG Letitia James, who
CAMPAIGNED on a promise to
“GET TRUMP!”
C: He HIMSELF has donated money
to Biden.
D: He HIMSELF supports the “STOP
TRUMP” PAC.
It is inconceivable that he was not moved, by conscience, tradition or decorum, to RECUSE himself from the case. Fortunately, however, this will be incontrovertible grounds for appeal.
3: The case revolved around the testimony of Stormy Daniels, a porn star, who has changed her story several times, and Michael Cohen, a CONVICTED perjurer (read liar)! Although thw prosecutor’s case was mildly supported by the testimony of Enquirer publisher David Pecker, Pecker’s testimony was CONTRADICTED BY HIS OWN TESTIMONY TO THE FBI!
4: Merchan blatantly castigated and intimidated Robert Corsello, a witness for Trump, who CONTRADICTED Cohen’s testimony.
5: The legal basis for the case to be tried as a felony was that the, so called “fraudulent business documentation” was done to hide another crime, but Merchan instructed the jury that they DIDN’T HAVE TO EVEN AGREE WHAT THE “OTHER CRIME” WAS!!!!! Without that extremely nebulous connection, the case would have, and should have, been tried, AT MOST, as only a misdemeanor.
6: One of the supposed “crimes” Trump was said to have committed is “election interference” (WTF?) by, presumably, concealing a story that might damage his chances for election! (If THAT is a crime, ladies and gentlemen, what about Bill Clinton’s campaign having a special designate to handle “Bimbo eruptions?”). This reminds me of leftist Saul Alinsky’s adage:in his Rules For Radicals, “Accuse THEM of what YOU are doing!”
Looking at all this, is it any wonder that Trump was found guilty?
As I said above, Franz Kafka, would be pleased.