Despite the detailed discussion, Bailey later minimized the interaction in a follow-up interview, claiming they “didn’t even mention the word ‘Donald Trump'” during their conversation, though it was clear what was being discussed, leading him to remark, “Well, obviously, we weren’t talking about the Mets.”
The New York State Rules of Judicial Conduct strictly stipulate that a judge should not engage in or consider communications outside the presence of the parties involved in the case without providing notice and an opportunity for responses. Engoron’s actions, if proven true, could be seen as a breach of these regulations. However, Al Baker, a spokesman for the state’s Office of Court Administration, defended the judge, asserting, “The decision Justice Engoron issued February 16 was his alone, was deeply considered, and was wholly uninfluenced by this individual,” according to WNBC.
Despite Bailey’s disclaimers of not being a Trump supporter, his past controversies, including a suspension of his law license for inappropriate conduct in another case, add layers of complexity to the credibility of his claims.
ALERT! Major Water Restrictions In Effect!
The investigation into Judge Engoron’s conduct highlights ongoing concerns regarding the treatment of Trump by New York legal authorities, including the state’s Democratic Attorney General Letitia James, who has been a vocal critic of Trump. This case encapsulates broader debates about fairness and the politicization of legal practices in high-profile litigations involving significant political figures.
