BOOM: Federalist Exposes Smoking Gun Evidence Of DC Judge’s Anti-Trump Bias

It was obvious to all of us that some of the judges ruling against Trump had it in for him from the beginning. But knowing something is not the same as proving it.

And Margot Cleveland, with her strong legal background knew just where to go looking for proof. Lo and behold, she found some!

She ran the full story on the Federalist, here, but the tl;dr summary goes something like this:

In mid-March of this year, while several of Trump’s policies and orders were before the court, members of the Judicial Conference met in Washington, D.C.. That by itself is not such a big deal. Chief Justice Roberts, and about 30 judges do this a couple of times a year to discuss the typical in-house policy stuff any regional meeting might cover.

But Bosberg — you remember him, don’t you? — was speaking with the other judges not just about the case, but about how a certain singular defendant might react to his ruling.

That’s the point in the story where Margot throws a flag.

In a memorandum obtained exclusively by The Federalist, a member of the Judicial Conference summarized the March meeting, including a “working breakfast” at which Justice Roberts spoke. According to the memorandum, “District of the District of Columbia Chief Judge James Boasberg next raised his colleagues’ concerns that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts leading to a constitutional crisis.”

“Chief Justice Roberts expressed hope that would not happen and in turn no constitutional crisis would materialize,” according to the memorandum. The summary of the working breakfast added that Chief Justice Roberts noted that “his interactions with the President have been civil and respectful, such as the President thanking him at the state of the union address for administering the oath.”

Donald Trump, however, is not merely the president: He is a Defendant in scores of lawsuits, including multiple cases in the D.C. District Court. As such, this conversation did not concern generic concerns of the judiciary, but specific discussions about a litigant currently before the same judges who expressed concern to the Chief Judge of the D.C. District Court that the Trump Administration would disregard the court’s orders.

Judge Boasberg’s comments reveal he and his colleagues hold an anti-Trump bias, for the Trump Administration had complied with every court order to date (and since for that matter). The D.C. District Court judges’ “concern” also went counter to the normal presumption courts hold — one that presumes public officials properly discharged their official duties. Apparently, that presumption does not apply to the current president, at least if you are litigating in D.C. — Federalist

There’s something  particularly precious about the guy who blew off direct instructions directed at him from his own legal superiors at the SCOTUS clutching his pearls about the possibility that Trump may not follow his Unconstitutional diktats.

Professor Cleveland takes those conclusions further. Trump was actively obeying even the ridiculous court orders as evidenced in communications that came up with the nomination of Bove. The judges themselves needed to be reigned in on more than one occasion.

The fact that DC judges were discussing Trump disobeying the law, when judicial practice requires the judge to proceed under an assumption that both laws and rulings will be obeyed, shows that they were not taking their job and the impartiality it requires of them, as seriously as they might otherwise do so.

Do you think Boasberg is still butthurt over missing out on the glory of presiding over that Jack Smith Special Prosecutor trial against Trump? Boasberg was announced as the one who had been picked to be the judge. But the case had to be moved to a Florida venue.

The poor bastard missed out on the glory and attention that other judges got for presiding over Trump trials. Was this his attempt to make up the lost opportunity?

It’s just one more reason Trump can give for change of venue the next time he’s facing this crowd.