For it to be a show trial there would have to be no realistic possibility of the jury finding him not guilty. I don't see why that should be the case.
As such, whether or not you agree that the judges behaviour actually is biased, if the judge is biased there is no reason to trust the US courts will be unbiased either.
The pre-written decisions alone, read out unmodified after listening to testimony is irregular enough that it is illogical to assume this judge is doing her job, as there is no evidence to suggest she is..
It's common for judges to read out their decisions. (Do you expect them to memorize their lines like actors?)
I don't know how you think you can know that the decisions are "unmodified". It's quite likely that the judge has prepared multiple options in advance and chosen one based on what happened at the hearing.