While the state of New York reducing Donald Trump’s original bond for his fraud case from $454 million to a marginally more reasonable $175 million was good news for him, for the leftist shills on MSNBC, it seemed like the worst news they had received all year.
As shown in a video shared to the social media platform X by conservative news site The Post Millennial, one of MSBNC’s guests had what can only be described as a meltdown in response to this news.
Now, as reported by The New York Times, while the deadline for Trump to pay a nearly half-a-billion-dollar bond was Monday, an appeals court allowed him to pay only a portion of it, giving him 10 days to come up with the $175 million while Trump appeals the judgment of the original case in a civil fraud case.
NBC News likewise noted that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against Trump involving a payment for a non-disclosure agreement with porn star Stormy Daniels, which was set to start on Monday, has also been postponed. It is now set for late April.
MSNBC guest reacts to Trump’s bond being reduced to $175 million: “This is so infuriating.” pic.twitter.com/DlbB6NKo4b
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) March 25, 2024
MSNBC guest Tristan Snell, a former New York assistant attorney general, could not conceal his frustration with the appeals court ruling about Trump’s bond, telling the MSNBC panel “honestly, this is so infuriating that I don’t even know what to do.”
Snell is a man obsessed, clearly.
In fact, besides being a former apparatchik in the Empire State attorney general’s office who was part of New York’s part of the civil lawsuit against Trump University settled in 2018 (and has apparently been a fave of liberals for it ever since), he’s also the author of the book “Taking Down Trump.” (Careful viewers will note he has it prominently displayed on the bookcase behind him.)
Has Trump been treated unfairly by the legal system?
Accidentally revealing the leftist mindset on the innumerable cases against Trump, Snell continued, “I don’t even know if I care what the process is that these judges are arriving at. Whatever it is, it’s flawed.”
Now, did Mr. Snell believe those processes were “flawed” based on impartial examination of the appellate judges’ decision, or was his judgment motivated by his obvious, seething hatred for Trump?
Snell quickly elucidated his thought process, telling the MSNBC panel the judges “have decided that he gets his own private court of justice.”
After claiming that Trump has received his own “private” legal system, in addition to “private planes,” “private clubs,” and his own “private militia” (referring to the leftist narrative regarding the Capitol incursion of Jan. 6, 2021), Snell ended his diatribe by saying, “This is an absolute travesty. It would not happen for anybody else.”
Really?
Has anyone else been ordered to pay half a billion dollars for an alleged crime that no one — not the banks involved nor Trump’s business associates — ever complained, or even seemed to care, about?
Has any other presidential candidate been targeted with an obscene number of lawsuits in what are clearly attempts to prevent him from winning the November election?
If anyone other than Trump had faced these legal challenges, most, if not all of them, would probably have been thrown out for lack of evidence.
Snell, in this appearance, exhibited the height of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
He claimed, with a straight face and all the moral indignation of an Old Testament prophet, that Trump is receiving preferential treatment from the courts based on this one extension granted him.
Remember, Trump has been ordered to pay $175 million of a $454 million bond.
The New York appellate court did not entirely dismiss Trump’s legal trouble with the wave of a magic wand, as Snell clearly seemed to believe.
Rather, it gave him a grudging extension on what was already an unprecedented judgment.
But, in a sense, Snell was correct.
As he told the MSNBC panel, this “would not happen for anyone else,” and in one way what he said was true.
No one but Trump would ever have received such an absurd judgment in the first place.
