“Allison Greenfield, law clerk to Judge Arthur Engoron, has been recently involved with leading anti-Trump organizations in New York City, and has even been caught on camera attending the ‘Fall Event’ of a group called the ‘Grand Street Democrats’ in October 2022,” The National Pulse reports. “Greenfield – whose partisan activities were the basis for Judge Arthur Engoron’s now-overturned gag order against President Donald Trump – has been advising Engoron throughout the case, notably glaring at Trump and rolling her eyes during presentations by Trump’s lawyers, according to in-court witnesses.”
That’s hardly the only flag-raiser.
“I have Uncovered screenshots from the X account of Dawn Marie Engoron, the wife of Leftist NYC Judge Arthur Engoron, who is overseeing the civil fraud against President Trump shows that she has been posting attacks on Trump from her account @dm_sminxs as the trial is ongoing,” conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer claimed on X. “This is incredible bias … Nobody can actually say this is a fair trial!”
EXCLUSIVE: I have Uncovered screenshots from the X account of Dawn Marie Engoron, the wife of Leftist NYC Judge Arthur Engoron, who is overseeing the civil fraud against President Trump shows that she has been posting attacks on Trump from her account @dm_sminxs as the trial is… https://t.co/LynqZsciiz pic.twitter.com/07xcIo7Kma
— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) November 8, 2023
While Dawn Engoron chose Newsweek (itself problematic in terms of unbiased reporting) to issue a denial through, the account she claims is not hers is locked down, and that keeps independent eyes away. Add to that the judge, a longtime Democrat donor, “has exhibited ‘clear judicial bias’ against Trump [and] failed to honor Trump’s due process rights,” per House GOP conference chair Rep. Elise Stefanik, who has filed an ethics complaint against Engoron accusing him of “weaponized lawfare.”
Another prominent example of Democrat judicial bias occurred in Georgia.
“An Obama-appointed federal judge issued a ruling … that undermined rule of law in Georgia,” Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger charged. “Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner of the Middle District of Georgia, sister of failed gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) enjoining Ben Hill and Muscogee counties from using legal processes under Georgia law to ensure only Georgia voters cast ballots in the January runoffs.”
“Notably, the judge is the sister of Stacey Abrams [and the wife of a “motivational speaker and emotional intelligence trainer” recently arrested “for human trafficking and attacking a teen”–DC]. On November 18, Stacey Abrams’s organization Fair Fight donated $2.5 million to Senate Majority PAC, for which the plaintiff Majority Forward serves as the nonprofit arm,” Raffensperger elaborated. “That a judge would rule on a case brought by a group heavily funded by her sister is very concerning.”
What’s also concerning, and indicative of another bias potential, is how Raffensperger, well aware of Democrat voting shenanigans happening right under his nose, interpreted Donald Trump saying “find” votes to mean anything other than what the president was really saying:
“We can go through signature verification and we’ll find hundreds of thousands of signatures, if you let us do it… You know that. You have no doubt about that. And you will find you will be at 11,779 within minutes because Fulton County is totally corrupt and so is she, totally corrupt.”
That makes it more than fair to ask why Democrat operative and Fulton County DA Fani Willis is trying to eviscerate the First Amendment and prosecute former “President Donald Trump and 18 other defendants (along with 30 unindicted coconspirators) for legally questioning the legitimacy of the outcome of the 2020 election in Georgia.”
It’s like the wrong people are on trial.
And yes, of course, rights prohibitionist Democrats are engaged in open lawfare against the Second Amendment as well. We see that in the numerous protracted courtroom battles taking place across the land, with states using their virtually unlimited tax plunder war chests to keep from acknowledging “shall not be infringed” and complying with the Supreme Court’s Bruen standard of history, text, and tradition at the time the Constitution was enacted.
One such case is unfolding in Illinois, where, again per Newsweek, “Illinois’ prohibition on high-power semiautomatic weapons is facing a new challenge, with a state representative petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to review”:
Now, state Rep. Dan Caulkins, a Republican, has petitioned the nation’s highest court to review the state Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law on due process, equal protection, and Second Amendment grounds. The petition argues that Justices Elizabeth Rochford and Mary Kay O’Brien participated in the case despite receiving campaign contributions from those who support the ban.”Both Justice Rochford and O’Brien received disproportionate campaign contributions, and both made a commitment to support the legislative policy of banning assault weapons,” Caulkins told WRSP-TV.
While O’Brien actually dissented on the case, one frequent correspondent to this writer puts things in perspective:
So, with the Caulkins V Pritzker case before SCOTUS, Pritzker may make the case that since O’Brien didn’t concur with Rochford that the ruling wasn’t tainted. Holy moly you should see why O’Brien dissented (because PICA [Protect Illinois Communities Act] doesn’t go far enough!)
What the Newsweek account fails to mention is the group that did the groundwork to expose this blatant judicial conflict of interest. It’s important to assign credit where due because it will otherwise remain unknown, even among most members of the gun owner community (and I speak from firsthand experience knowing what it’s like to have the media and latecomers take over an original story without a backward glance).
Gun owners who are unfamiliar with the Mom-At-Arms website have an opportunity to correct that by seeing their original reporting documenting how both judges are financially beholden to the tune of $500,000 each not only with ban challenge defendant Gov. Jay Pritzker, which violated the IL Supreme Court Code of Judicial Conduct, but have also been supported by Everytown/Moms Demand Action and have established themselves as citizen disarmament activists in their own right.
And tellingly, the tweets posted and linked to in order to document the conflict no longer appear, because the judge had her Democrat operatives delete her account after the election. As did Judge O’Brien (who was congratulated by Everytown, who promised she’d “provide fair and impartial rulings on gun safety.”
They’re not only conflicted but hiding it. You don’t get more in-your-face corrupt than that. But don’t look for the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board to care.
As things stand, there’s no guarantee SCOTUS will take up Rep. Caulkins’ petition. Add to that, per the Chicago Sun Times, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals “upholds Illinois gun ban, finds no 2nd Amendment protection for assault weapons.”
“Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: ‘Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it’s enemy action’,” Ian Fleming’s notorious villain observed in Goldfinger.
What do you call it when it happens so often that you lose count?
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
