Lisa Rubin Buries The Lede

NEW: According to reporting & judging from Trump’s social media, his camp is considering another motion to recuse Judge Juan Merchan on the basis of his daughter’s leadership of an online strategy firm that has, among other clients, worked for Biden & other Dem candidates. 1/.

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

More accurately, Trump continues to throw money down a bottomless pit, to no effect at all. 

In particular, Trump argued New York law demands recusal where the judge knows that their spouse or a person “known by the judge to be within the sixth degree of relationship to either of them … has an interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding.” 3/

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

Is Merchan’s daughter a bookie taking bets on the outcome of Trump’s trial?

But most of the argument was about the firm’s past. Indeed, while noting the firm worked for the Biden-Harris campaign in 2020, the motion was fuzzier about its current work, explaining only the firm “continues to promote messaging directed, at least in part, against President… pic.twitter.com/Cf2vtjozWx

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

Wade through the hand-wringing, we’ll get there.

But if, as Trump has asserted, even the appearance of bias demands recusal, an argument based on the work of Merchan’s daughter’s firm is not frivolous. On the other hand, it’s hard for legal experts following the case to see that when 1) it comes *thisclose* to trial; and…

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

Does the argument have to be frivolous in order to be frivolous? This could take another 25 tweets. Oh, dear…

But even if Merchan should be disqualified, Trump’s jeopardizing the safety of the judge’s family member is unacceptable.

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

Not sure how we got here. Where are we, anyway?

When the personal, political, and legal collapse into one, as they have for Trump, the usual remedies — bail revocation, expanded gag orders, even criminal contempt — don’t seem to meet the moment.

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

Maybe it’s time for a criminal trial? And to just ignore Trump’s frivolous arguments? Because, you know: criminal trial?

p.s. This was Merchan’s opinion denying Trump’s recusal motion last August:https://t.co/ZmeIgLMHIu

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

It’s only eroding Merchan’s authority if you say it is; or might be. Because really, at this point, there’s no reason to take Trump seriously.

That body’s May 4, 2023 opinion — which Merchan cited in denying Trump’s recusal demand — found “nothing in the inquiry to suggest that the outcome of the case could have any effect on the judge’s relative, the relative’s business, or any of their interests.” pic.twitter.com/LlQUlBv3uX

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) March 31, 2024

And that’s why. Finally! Precedent does matter. Especially in a legal situation. Been there, done that. Aside from the fact this all depends on what argument Trump’s lawyers make, as opposed to the argument he’s made on social media. (Trump is complaining two of Merchan’s clients raised political donations by referencing this case. That’s not exactly her benefiting from the outcome.) Change the facts, change the outcome; and what new facts is Trump presenting since that opinion from a year ago?

So far: none. And if he does waste more money making his lawyers do it in court, so what?

Now, about that criminal trial….