Making good on the network’s alleged promise to bring on actual conservatives, Wednesday’s CNN Primetime brought in Article III Project founder and former Justice Gorsuch clerk Mike Davis to debate host Pamela Brown over the conflicts of interest in Donald Trump’s Trump case before Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg and Judge Juan Merchan.
Spoiler alert: It didn’t go well for Brown as she repeatedly pushed back against even the existence of such conflicts, which was rich considering she’s the daughter of a former Democratic governor, the late John Brown (KY).
Brown bemoaned Trump’s statements as threatening from the get-go: “Why target the judge, like that in particular?”
Davis responded with the obvious, which was that “Trump understands that this is a political prosecution against him by a George Soros-funded Manhattan D.A., Alvin Bragg.”
Brown interjected as though Davis had spouted off a pants-on-fire lie: “Okay. Let me just stop you, right there. He’s not — George Soros donated to a PAC that then donated to Alvin Bragg. Go ahead.”
Davis calmly pushed back that he did support him as the PAC he gave money to “went to support Alvin Bragg’s campaign” with the prosecution having arrived despite the fact that “the prior Manhattan D.A..” “[t]he Manhattan U.S. Attorney,” and “[t]he Federal Election Commission declined to prosecute these charges.”
He added that Bragg only changed course once “he started taking heat, from the left and so, then Alvin Bragg recruited the — one of the top officials, from the Biden Justice Department, Matthew Colangelo,” who had been working for Deputy Attorney General Vanita Gupta (and served in that role in an acting capacity prior to her Senate confirmation).
Add in the fact that “this judge actually donated to Biden’s campaign” and, overall, it’s clear “this judge...could...not be impartial”.
A flustered Brown interjected to lament he “threw a lot out there” and required “fact-check[ing]” (including her acceptance of Bragg’s claim he “developed new evidence” against Trump) before circling back to her first question that criticizing the judge was akin to threatening his life.
Davis upped the ante, saying he wasn’t “understanding what President Trump said there that could potentially incite violence”.
He went even further, pointing out liberals upset about Trump’s rhetoric “were awfully quiet when Democrats were running illegal obstruction of justice campaigns, out of Supreme — outside of Supreme Court justices’ homes, for months, still running them that led to a 1 a.m. assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh his wife, Ashley, and their two teenage daughters.”
Brown had started near the end of his answer to cut him off and, when she did eventually get a chance to speak, dismissed his comparison as though it were irrelevant. Thankfully, Davis wouldn’t let that go (click “expand”):
BROWN: Not sure about the Democratic conspiracy. But that’s not even what I’m asking you about. So, let’s focus on exactly what we’re talking about. Trump called the judge, “Trump-hating.” He said this is a Trump-hating judge that his daughter was involved in Democratic politics. And the concern is that that could go against exactly what the judge had asked for in the courtroom. Because, as you well know, the former President has a fervent devout group of followers, you know that?
DAVIS: Well, I mean, are these the same followers, who tried to kill Justice Kavanaugh, in his home?
BROWN: Okay. Listen, we’re focusing on this topic.
DAVIS: I mean this is ridiculous.
BROWN: We’re focusing on this topic. But how much of this has to do with trying to get the judge off of this case, in your view?
DAVIS: Well, I mean, if the judge has the appearance of bias, which it looks like, he does? He donated to Joe Biden’s campaign. He should get off this case. And this judge has a history, with President Trump, in prior cases. So maybe that’s what President Trump is referring to.
Brown next moved to brushing off Davis’s next point about how even some of her fellow liberal journalists have raised concerns about the case Bragg brought and demanded “evidence” that “this former DOJ employee, under Biden, is colluding in this conspiracy, against Trump?”
Davis was incredulous and drew further ire when he said Trump wouldn’t get a fair trial as Manhattan almost uniformly voted for President Biden (click “expand”):
DAVIS: Well, Matthew Colangelo was the — works — he was the number two to the number three in the Biden Justice Department. And then, in December, Alvin Bragg hired him, to go work in the Manhattan D.A.’s office. Do you think that there were any conversations, or do you think Matthew Colangelo just quit his job in the Biden Justice Department, and went and knocked on Alvin Bragg’s door in Manhattan? Clearly, they had discussions and I hope that House Judiciary Committee Chairman subpoenas, those records, from the Biden Justice Department, and the communications between Bragg and Colangelo.
BROWN: Do you think that this will end up going to trial?
DAVIS: It will probably go to trial, because I don’t think Trump’s going to get a fair hearing, in New York, when you have the Democrat Party machine, picking these local Manhattan trial judges, and we haven’t had a Republican governor, in New York, in 17 years. And so, there’s no chance he’s going to get a fair appeal. So yes, this is going to go to trial.
BROWN: Yes.
DAVIS: And when you have a 95 percent jury pool [sic] that hates Donald Trump?
BROWN: What is your evidence for that?
DAVIS: He’s not going to get a fair trial. I think —
BROWN: What is your evidence that 95 percent hate Donald Trump? You’re throwing a lot of stuff out there, and I just am wondering what exactly you have, specifically, to back up your claims.
DAVIS: — so, we know that the — we know that the Manhattan D.A. took was — took a million dollars, in campaign support, from two different PACs, not just one, two different PACs, to support his campaign, so, a million dollars from George Soros. We know that this case was dead.
The back-and-forth ended when Brown tried one last time to have Davis denounce Trump: “But I’m just wondering, is that what you’re implying that that then justifies Trump, targeting the judge, publicly?”
Davis fired back: “Justify speaking out? You don’t think Trump is allowed to speak out publicly about an outrageous — so, he can’t criticize the — well, I think there’s a — I think you have to look at the history of this judge.”
All the while, Brown clapped back and twice insisted she wasn’t “saying that.”
This CNN embarrassment and irony of the daughter of a former Democratic governor insisting conflicts of interest are irrelevant was made possible thanks to advertisers such as Carvana, ClearChoice, and Consumer Cellular. Follow the links to see their contact information at the MRC’s Conservatives Fight Back page.
To see the relevant transcript from April 5, click “expand.”
CNN Primetime: Inside the Trump Investigations
April 5, 2023
9:07 p.m. EasternPAMELA BROWN: I want to bring in Mike Davis, a Trump legal ally, and former Gorsuch clerk. Mike, thanks for your time tonight. So, you just heard Donald Trump.
MIKE DAVIS: Thank you.
BROWN: That was just one of many attacks he made last night. Why target the judge, like that in particular?
DAVIS: Well, I think President Trump understands that this is a political prosecution against him by a George Soros-funded Manhattan D.A., Alvin Bragg.
BROWN: Okay. Let me just stop you, right there. He’s not — George Soros donated to a PAC that then donated to Alvin Bragg. Go ahead.
DAVIS: Okay. So, it was George Soros’s money that went to support Alvin Bragg’s campaign. The — the prior Manhattan D.A. declined to prosecute these charges at Alvin Bragg’s urging, when Alvin Bragg worked for the Attorney General’s office. The Manhattan U.S. Attorney declined to prosecute these charges. The Federal Election Commission declined to prosecute these charges. And Alvin Bragg himself declined to prosecute these charges, until he started taking heat, from the left and so, then Alvin Bragg recruited the — one of the top officials, from the Biden Justice Department, Matthew Colangelo. He was in the number three office, in the Biden Justice Department, to come revive this dead case. And the Manhattan D.A.’s office, they brought these bogus political charges, against President Trump. And then, he finds out that this judge actually donated to Biden’s campaign. So, that at least raises the appearance of impartiality — the appearance that this judge —
BROWN: Okay.
DAVIS: — could be — not be impartial against President Trump.
BROWN: You just — you threw out a lot there. Let me just go back and fact-check a few things. First of all, Cy Vance, he was the former D.A. in Manhattan, he said that the prosecutors, the federal prosecutors, asked him to — to step away from this case. That was something that they were looking at, at the time. We’ve heard from Alvin Bragg saying that he developed new evidence, which is why this case was brought back. So, those are a few aspects. But we’re talking about the judge, in particular, in this case, right? He — Trump went after this judge, only hours after the judge warned him, in that courtroom, “Do not engage in rhetoric that has the potential to cause harm to anyone, to incite violence.” Was that — was it wrong, for former President Trump, to target the judge, only hours after that?
DAVIS: So, I’m not understanding what President Trump said there that could potentially incite violence and I find it very interesting that the same Democrats, who are criticizing President Trump now, because he’s getting railroaded in New York, were awfully quiet, when Democrats were running illegal obstruction of justice campaigns, out of Supreme — outside of Supreme Court justices’ homes, for months, still running them that led to a 1 a.m. assassination attempt —
BROWN: Okay. That’s —
DAVIS: — against Justice Kavanaugh —
BROWN: Okay.
DAVIS: — his wife, Ashley, and their two teenage daughters.
BROWN: Not sure about the Democratic conspiracy. But that’s not even what I’m asking you about. So, let’s focus on exactly what we’re talking about. Trump called the judge, “Trump-hating.” He said this is a Trump-hating judge that his daughter was involved in Democratic politics. And the concern is that that could go against exactly what the judge had asked for in the courtroom. Because, as you well know, the former President has a fervent devout group of followers, you know that?
DAVIS: Well, I mean, are these the same followers, who tried to kill Justice Kavanaugh, in his home?
BROWN: Okay. Listen, we’re focusing on this topic.
DAVIS: I mean this is ridiculous.
BROWN: We’re focusing on this topic. But how much of this has to do with trying to get the judge off of this case, in your view?
DAVIS: Well, I mean, if the judge has the appearance of bias, which it looks like, he does? He donated to Joe Biden’s campaign. He should get off this case. And this judge has a history, with President Trump, in prior cases. So maybe that’s what President Trump is referring to.
BROWN: This case is now moving into discovery. What kind of fight should we expect to see from the Trump team? Will lawyers try to delay as much as they can, pushing it toward the election?
DAVIS: I don’t understand why the lawyers would want to delay this case at all. It’s a dog of a case. Even The New York Times and The Washington Post have pretty much laughed at this case. It’s a joke of a legal theory that Alvin Bragg is pursuing. It’s clearly a political head. He’s colluding with Matthew Colangelo, from the Biden Justice Department, to use —
BROWN: Okay.
DAVIS: — legal warfare — lawfare here to get Trump.
BROWN: And let me just say, too, we should note that one of the — Trump’s attorneys, Joe Tacopina, he openly says that the judge, in this case, is not biased. That is important to note here and what evidence do you have that they are colluding in this conspiracy that this former DOJ employee, under Biden, is colluding in this conspiracy, against Trump? What evidence do you have? Because I’ve heard you, in other interviews, bring up that same exact thing.
DAVIS: Well, Matthew Colangelo was the — works — he was the number two to the number three in the Biden Justice Department. And then, in December, Alvin Bragg hired him, to go work in the Manhattan D.A.’s office. Do you think that there were any conversations, or do you think Matthew Colangelo just quit his job in the Biden Justice Department, and went and knocked on Alvin Bragg’s door in Manhattan? Clearly, they had discussions and I hope that House Judiciary Committee Chairman subpoenas, those records, from the Biden Justice Department, and the communications between Bragg and Colangelo.
BROWN: Do you think that this will end up going to trial?
DAVIS: It will probably go to trial, because I don’t think Trump’s going to get a fair hearing, in New York, when you have the Democrat Party machine, picking these local Manhattan trial judges, and we haven’t had a Republican governor, in New York, in 17 years. And so, there’s no chance he’s going to get a fair appeal. So yes, this is going to go to trial.
BROWN: Yes.
DAVIS: And when you have a 95 percent jury pool that hates Donald Trump?
BROWN: What is your evidence for that?
DAVIS: He’s not going to get a fair trial. I think —
BROWN: What is your evidence that 95 percent hate Donald Trump? You’re throwing a lot of stuff out there, and I just am wondering what exactly you have, specifically, to back up your claims.
DAVIS: — so, we know that the — we know that the Manhattan D.A. took was — took a million dollars, in campaign support, from two different PACs, not just one, two different PACs, to support his campaign, so, a million dollars from George Soros. We know that this case was dead.
BROWN: Hold on. It wasn’t a million dollars.
DAVIS: It got passed over multiple times.
BROWN: Hold on. George Soros gave a million dollars to a progressive PAC. That progressive PAC gave half a million dollars to Alvin Bragg. None of it was earmarked for Bragg. George Soros’s rep say that they had never communicated, there was nothing of the sort. But go ahead.
DAVIS: That’s the first one. There’s also a second PAC, the New York PAC. That’s you’re talking — there are two different PACs. So, you should probably take a look at that when you’re fact-checking me, but so you have this Soros-funded D.A. bringing these bogus political charges, and you have a judge, on this case, who donated to Trump’s political opponent, Joe Biden. So, you tell me if that looks like a fair process.
BROWN: Then why did Joe Tacopina say that the judge wasn’t biased, he wasn’t concerned about that? Why did he say that then? Are you saying he was wrong?
DAVIS: Well, I don’t know. I’m not Trump’s lawyer. I don’t have to go stand in front of this judge every day. Maybe Joe understands that this judge is not going to move the venue here. He’s not going to recuse from the case. He’s going to have to live with this judge, who donated to Joe Biden’s campaign, so he doesn’t want to anger him.
BROWN: All right we’re going to, of course, check that.
DAVIS: But for recusal, that’s not the standard. The standard is appearance of bias. There is an appearance of bias, when this judge donated to Joe Biden, President Trump’s political opponent.
BROWN: But do you think that justifies Trump, to his millions of fervent devout followers, targeting the judge? I know we’re kind of circling back, and we do have to end this soon. But I’m just wondering, is that what you’re implying that that then justifies Trump, targeting the judge, publicly?
DAVIS: Justify speaking out? You don’t think Trump is allowed to speak out publicly about an outrageous —
BROWN: I’m not saying that. I’m not saying that.
DAVIS: — so, he can’t criticize the —
BROWN: He said, he was “Trump-hating.”
DAVIS: Well, I think there’s a — I think you have to look at the history of this judge with Trump, in prior lawsuits. I understand, wasn’t this the judge who sent President Trump’s 75-year old accountant to Rikers Island? I mean, there’s a history here that Trump is referring to.
BROWN: And we should note that Michael Bloomberg, when he was a Republican, first appointed this judge. Later on, a Democratic governor. And we’re actually going to speak to a retired judge, later in the show, to talk about all this, But Mike Davis, really good to have you on, and to hear your points, in this case, in defense of Donald Trump. We appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
DAVIS: Thank you. Thank you.
