The recent news of former President Donald Trump’s arraignment in Miami is yet another reminder of the political turmoil that has been brewing in our nation for the past few years.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against Trump has taken many turns, with a federal case now taking precedence and Bragg himself facing a pair of lawsuits related to his filing of charges against Trump.
It appears that our nation’s judicial system is being used as a tool to further partisan agendas, rather than providing justice on behalf of those affected by criminal activity.
Fox News notes: “The Heritage Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based conservative think tank, has sued Bragg under suspicions that he and his office coordinated or communicated with the Justice Department, the White House, and Rep. Daniel Goldman, D-N.Y., about the prosecution. In its lawsuit, Heritage claims that such actions eventually led to investigations by several U.S. House committees into Bragg’s conduct.”
Trump was arraigned last week on federal charges related to his handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, leading many to believe that Bragg’s case against him has now been adjourned.
An ethics panel said, “neither the former president nor his lawyers have shown any evidence to support their claims that the judge in his hush-money criminal case has an anti-Trump bias.”
This statement contradicts the defense’s narrative that Judge Juan Manuel Merchan would need to recuse himself due to alleged bias towards Trump. It also highlights how quickly legal proceedings can be derailed by unsupported accusations meant only to further personal interests.
In addition, Special Counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed by Biden’s Department of Justice, recently brought forth a federal case against Trump regarding 37 counts involving his handling of classified documents.
A federal judge in Florida has announced a preliminary start date of Aug. 14 for the trial of former President Donald Trump in the case involving his handling of classified documents.
“U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon bookmarked the last two weeks in August for the historic trial, part of an omnibus order setting some early ground rules and deadlines for the case. That would represent a startlingly rapid pace for a case that is expected to be complicated and require lengthy pretrial wrangling over extraordinarily sensitive classified secrets,” Politico reported.
If found guilty on all counts, Trump could face decades in prison – an outcome that would surely have serious implications for the upcoming presidential election if it were to come about before then.
During his arraignment last week, U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon marked Aug 14th as a preliminary start date for this trial – illustrating how quickly things can move when someone is determined enough and willing enough to push them through despite potential ethical complications down the line should they fail or succeed in their mission.
What we know for certain right now is that both sides are adamant about proving their points but so far neither have provided concrete proof supporting their stance beyond mere speculation and conjecture which leads one question: why are these cases even moving forward?
Is it because justice needs to be served or because both parties involved simply want something from each other? The former may be true but until concrete evidence comes forth it will remain difficult for anyone outside this situation fully understand what is going on without falling into bias or supposition – something which no courtroom should accept as fact regardless of whom they are dealing with or who appointed them there in first place .
