Below is my column in the New York Post on the expected indictment against former President Donald Trump. It is an effort to reanimate a long dead legal claim against Trump, but could reanimate his presidential campaign.
Here is the column:
“It’s moving. It’s alive. It’s alive . . . it’s moving . . . IT’S ALIVE!”
The scene from the 1931 movie “Frankenstein” came to mind this week as Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg prepared an indictment of former President Donald Trump.
It is the ultimate gravedigger charge, where Bragg unearthed a case from 2016 and, through a series of novel steps, is seeking to bring it back to life.
Of course, like the good doctor, Bragg shows little concern over what he has created in his Frankenstein indictment.
Bragg is combining parts from both state and federal codes.
He is reportedly going to convert a misdemeanor for falsifying financial records into a prosecution of a federal crime.
The federal crime is reportedly the failure to report a payment of $130,000 to former porn star Stormy Daniels to hush up an affair.
That was just before the presidential election and Bragg is alleging that it was an effective campaign donation.
Bragg is attempting something that many lawyers think is as improbable as the reanimation of the dead.
The Justice Department itself declined this prosecution and both the former chair of the Federal Election Commission and various election law experts have thrown shade on the theory.
Not only did Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus Vance, not bring this case, but Bragg himself stopped the prosecution.
It was after one of Bragg’s lead prosecutors resigned and wrote a book on prosecuting Trump that pressure became too much for the district attorney, who grabbed his shovel and went to work.
There are serious challenges to this prosecution, including an argument that time has expired under the statute of limitations.
The limit is two years for a misdemeanor and, even if he can convert this into a felony, it is not clear if he can meet the longer five-year limitation.
Bragg will have to convince a court that Trump paid the hush money for the sole purpose of the election.
As a married man and television celebrity, Trump had other reasons to try to avoid a scandal.
That is precisely why such cases (like one against former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards) failed in prior prosecutions.
However, the greater danger may come if he succeeds in moving this case to trial.
Locals in New York will be thrilled, but will the rest of the country join the pitchfork carrying mob?
This is a patently political prosecution.
Indeed, of all of the potential charges that Trump is facing in Washington, Atlanta and New York, this is one that he must have hoped would come first.
The investigation into Trump’s actions at Mar-a-Lago by the Justice Department could raise well-established crimes and an array of evidence.
While a possible charge in Georgia over election violations is weaker, it is also based on a stronger legal foundation.If Trump were seeking a way to prove the political weaponization of the criminal justice system, Bragg just fulfilled that narrative.
Now, if these other cases result in charges, it will look like Democrats are piling on to knock Trump out of the race for 2024.
They will be tainted by this transparently political prosecution.
Indeed, voters could well view the election as a vote against the establishment and the media — the very thing that got Trump elected in 2016.
A prosecution is likely to extend beyond the election.
However, if it is thrown out before that date, it will again reinforce Trump’s claims of political targeting.
The prosecution could add a truly wicked dimension to the election.
While Biden is accused of illegally possessing an array of classified material in various locations, the Justice Department has long (in my view, wrongly) followed a policy that it cannot prosecute a sitting president.
However, would it indict Trump but not Biden on that basis? Again, the public is unlikely to stand for an apparent double standard.
Then there is the question of a self-pardon. I have long maintained that a president can pardon himself.
That would mean that the election could become a vote on who you want protected from prosecution: Biden (under the DOJ rule) or Trump (under a self pardon).
While many celebrate Bragg restoring life to the statutorily deceased, they should consider what he has wrought.
Bragg is releasing this case into a public that is already on edge.
Polls show that a large number of Americans believe that the legal system is being politicized and hold both state and federal government in suspicion.
A fifth of Americans now view the government as the greatest threat facing the nation. What is truly shocking is that 53% in one poll agreed with the statement that the FBI acts like “Biden’s Gestapo.”
This case could well succeed at trial, but it will come at a great cost even if overturned on appeal. It is inviting other prosecutors to act with the same political abandon.
In the 1931 movie, Dr. Frankenstein was warned, “You have created a monster, and it will destroy you!”
Bragg is risking the reanimation of more than a cadaverous crime. Indeed, he could single-handedly reanimate the presidency of Donald J. Trump.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and a professor at George Washington University Law School.
“Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.” Lavrentiy Beria, Chief of Stalin’s secret police.
Jonathan: You, the GOP, Fox and many on this bog have become apocalyptic over the impending indictment of Trump by DA Alvin Bragg. I mean, the NY case is not even the most serious of the charges facing the Trumpster. Nevertheless, you have spent 3 columns attacking the Bragg indictment. You call it the “ultimate Frankenstein indictment”–an attempt to at the improbable–the “reanimation of the dead”. Why so much hyperbole? Because that’s what Murdock pays you to do so you echo the Fox line. And all this comes even though Bragg has not brought an indictment and we don’t even know the nature of the possible charges. And it’s possible, but not probable, that Bragg may decide not to indict Trump.
Your column is a rambling array of disjointed claims–that the case in Georgia is “weaker” (?), and if Trump is indicted why not Biden for having classified doc in his possession–all claims completely unrelated to the Bragg case. Complete distraction! But in a curious finale you say: “This case could well succeed at trial…”. What an admission after spending so much time claiming this is purely a political prosecution that should fail on a motion to dismiss.
For all the hyperbole maybe we should just take a big breath and wait to see whether Bragg actually bring charges. That will give you ample opportunity to use your legal expertise to analyze the case. Until then, I say maybe you need to save your ammunition, chill out and save your columns for other important news–that I will cover in another comment.
Right, more important news….like Xi and Putin having a 5 hour conference about taking over the world while Joe Biden meets with the cast of Ted Lasso.
. . . because what we say now may influence what will happen.
I’d bet it never goes to trial. Look for a dismissal
See “Fani Willis.”
JT: “They will be painted by this transparently political prosecution.”
They will be painted.
They will be tainted.
Trump may be sainted.
Trump will be sainted? His followers dont even go to church. Come to think of nor do you, so there is that.
The hubris of unholy alliances declaring who is saintly.
“The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you very much.”
*Trump Apostle’s inner baby Gekko.
dgsnowden – you left out “greed for power”. That is the most dangerous form of greed we live with.
What precisely does the law state the Secret Service is to protect Trump from? Does it include U.S. Marshalls?
Most of the Secret Service is working for Hunter.
No!
Meanwhile Xi is in his easy chair eating popcorn and watching as the USA is rapidly sinking.
So can someone explain the math to me?
The payoff to Stormy took place Nov 2016.
That’s the alleged crime. Then the bookkeeping / accounting of his reimbursement of Cohen and how it was recorded.
So statute of limitations would be from Nov 2016.
Of course one could argue that the actual crime is how the payoff was recorded. So it would be the last act or payment to Cohen.
So lets say 2017. End of 2017.
The statute of limitations 2yrs. But using Bragg’s logic… 5yrs. So lets say 5yrs from Jan 1, 2018… that’s Jan 1, 2023.
Oops!
So how then does he still charge Trump even under 5yr statute of limitations which also clearly has passed?
Or does he say it wasn’t until April 15th or later due to Trump’s filing of his return? Even more convoluted because its the moment he makes the payment that the disbursement is recorded.
So it still doesn’t work. So what am I missing?
-G
what you are missing is that Donald Trump committed a crime and his supporters, JUST LIKE DEMOCRATS, are defending their man. This is what ideologies do to intelligent people. Truth, honor, integrity are no where on the radar in today’s political landscape, and it has given us Woke, Transwhatever, drag shows in schools, gender affirming Orwellian double speak, BLM, DNC, GOP, etc.
Ron DeSantis is right to distance himself from such a dumpster fire man like DJP. Frankly, Hillary, Biden, Trump should all be locked up in the same cell, lock the cell, throw away the key. It was bad enough with Bill Clinton and the stained blue dress. Now this. It is pathetic really that Americans have become such, well, trolls
RCP explains it really well:
“Ménage à Trois – A President, a Prosecutor, and a Porn Star”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2023/03/21/menage_a_trois__a_president_a_prosecutor_and_a_porn_star_149008.html
I’d like to hear ‘cc’ detail the “crime” he so ardently espouses. What crime, exactly? This is like the fools that spout “Trump Lied” without a single shred of evidence or explanation. It’s easy to make absurd claims, not so easy to justify them. The “crime” is being committed by this NY low life Manhattan DA; and ‘cc’ and his friends are facilitating it.
You just defended prostitution and marital infidelity. Well done. As CC stated, Trump supporters are just like Clinton / blue dress supporters: “where is the crime? it was consensual!”
well done
Anonymous – Sleeping with a porn star, or any person, is not “prostitution” unless money is agreed upon in advance. Indeed, prostitution per se, in contrast to pimping or solicitation, has virtually been decriminialized around the country. Of course, marital infidelity is not treated as a crime any more, even though statute books in some states may still have statutes so saying. If we are to condemn Trump for a dalliance when he was a private citizen, what should we say about JFK?
What you’re missing is that you do not know what charges will be filed.
For example, did Costello dangle a pardon to Cohen in April of 2018, as alleged? We don’t know.
I don’t understand why so many people can’t simply wait to see whether charges are filed, and if so, what they are, and what the evidence is.
Turley,
While the Justice Dept can’t indict a sitting POTUS… they can be impeached and then charged.
The reason you take that path… POTUS could always pardon himself so charges would be moot.
He can’t stop an impeachment proceeding.
(Although he could pardon himself during the impeachment process so that would negate potential charges.)
-G
Evidently, the Justice Department can neither indict nor impeach a sitting president. .. which kind of narrows it down. As I understand it, Prof Turley suggests a president can indicted, and also pardon himself.
*not sure if he could pardon himself during the Impeachment process *and* that would negate potential charges . .. as I understand it the impeachment bar is intentionally vague; ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’
From a legal standpoint on the federal matter, I’m not seeing how this is different from the John Edwards case. Nor have I seen ANYBODY cite a difference in the facts.
The politically, if you just let Trump implode on his own, which he has already done, the matter is settled. But the Democrats just can’t resist telling everybody “hey, look, we’re just as bad as he is.”
Trump couldn’t ask for a better press agent than the Democratic Party.
Edward’s payoff was via a donor.
Trump reimbursed Cohen from personal funds not anywhere associated w election.
Trump’s actions could have been done without his run for POTUS as a private citizen. Edwards is a politician….
So that’s the main thing that’s different and why its harder to go after Trump.
Well, I meant a difference in the facts that shows Trump is actually guilty. The Edwards case was full of holes. You’re claiming the Trump case is even more so.
@SteveJ,
Its Turley making that statement. He’s the lawyer.
But yes, there are more holes in Trump’s case. Especially if he did this with someone before Stormy.
(Signing an NDA and being paid consideration to do so) There’s nothing illegal about that.
So if it happened before 2016 POTUS run… its game over for Bragg. Just to start.
Of course they’d hold it while they go for a quick dismissal.
“difference in the facts that shows Trump is actually guilty.”
Guitly of what. What is the data?
The only person with a claim against Edwards was the wealthy donor funding the cover up.
That is true now. it was true at the time.
Edwards wife divorced him – Good for her.
If Melainia wants to divorce Trump – that is her business. Not Democrats, not Svelaz, not Braggs.
There is no crime within a thousand miles of this.
And Fraud requires actual harm to someone. WHO ?
There are significant differences between Edwards and Trump – all favor Trump.
Edwards did spend Campaign funds.
Trump did not.
Edwards was hiding something that was ongoing.
Trump was hiding something from a decade before.
Edwards had two motives – to hide this from his wife and to hide this from the public.
Trump has both of those as well as to protect his business interests.
Edwards was paying from campaign funds to hide and care for a pregnant mistress in the midst of a campaign.
The funds edwards was using came from a specific donor who was aware of what he was paying for.
At the time I argued that the Edwards campaign should implode, but that criminal charges were a huge mistake.
There was no fraud. If the donor funding this sought to go after Edwards he could do so civilly.
As to Trump imploding on his own ?
You may be right. Though I suspect not.
Democrats can not help but constantly make Trump relevant.
Regardless, you are absolutely correct that Government should stay out of the election.
It is far more arguable that Bragg prosecuting Trump where there is no crime in the midst of an election is itself a crime.
I would note that we have seen Prosecutors go down over things like this.
The fraudulent efforts to take out a Missouri Governor resulted in criminal charges against the prosecutor.
Adn the Jusse Smolet case went very badly for Foxx.
Further NY has a reputation of ambitious democrats taking out other ambitious democrats.
This is a dangerous move for Bragg.
This is just the warm up.
Plenty more Soviet indictments coming.
Bragg Art
Well, for those sitting on the “Dual justice” fence, it is now a publicly embraced democratic party value. How innocent are you? It depends on your voter registration. Why do you think there are so many independents in California? They are republicans trying to protect themselves. You can expect that at the federal level from here on out.
Dear Prof Turley,
And where, pray tell, will the president’s Secret Service detail be staying when they clap the Trump Apostle in irons? Rikers Island ain’t got no maid service or free wi fi.
Up with this we shall not put . .. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ba8suBGFww
We have truly crossed into the surreal. Our whole political/cultural eco-system seems stuck in a monstrous Trump v Biden Frankenstein stitch-up. Human tissue over the latest bio-neurological synapsis integration technology and a GPT-4 AI chat box.
*pardon me, but if you can’t impeach Frankenstein, who can you impeach?
Impeachment notes:
~ Bill noodling Monica: full acquittal.
~ 1st Trump : Hell no .. . impeached the wrong guy.
~ 2nd Trump: Good try . .. not enough time.
I’m inclined to wait and see if any indictment is brought and what the charges are. We all seem to agree that what the professor describes is a frivolous prosecution. Even the talking heads on CNN agree.
The possibilities are beyond this stretch of a charge.
Cohen has appeared before the grand jury several times. Surely he wasn’t needed so many times to affirm his claims about the hush money details. He was privy to a lot more than that one thing. He is known as Trump’s “fixer.” Maybe he testified about other things he fixed that were potential crime.
As well, Alan Weissenberg has testified about Trump’s activities. Maybe not in this case. I’m not sure. The point being that who knows what else was discussed in the secrecy of 5e grand jury room?
Cohen has been public about his charges against Trump for years. The prosecutor decided to table the investigation when he first took over. That the zombie case was brought back to life suggests some new evidence or testimony?
There’s no guarantee that the grand jury will vote to indict. Even if the saying goes “it’s easy to indict a ham sandwich.” It’s odd that the last minute testimony of Cohen’s former lawyer was even allowed.
Still, I’m dubious that this whole thing is nothing less than a political harassment of an individual who is running for president.
The rhetoric used about Trump since his campaign and election has certainly influenced public opinion and likely tainted the jury pool.
Lawyers are “fixers”. When you have a problem you hire a lawyer to “fix” it. Quit trying to sound noble.
It was Cohens job to help his client legally.
This trial is even worse than Flynn’s lynching by Elliot Sullivan. Another rogue judge that belongs in the unemployment line. Or prison.
Flynn wasn’t lynched, and Sullivan did his job.
Sullivan’s job was to lynch General Flynn, and he did it with pleasure. Flynn joined many similar victims: Nick Sandmann, George Zimmerman, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula (maker of the video blamed by Hillary Clinton for the Benghazi attack), Kyle Rittenhouse, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Derek Chauvin, Julian Assange, the QAnon Shaman and other J6 Defendants, and many others whose names I have forgotten – all “lynched” by the MSM, Democrats, and political forces allied to the Democrats, because they were convenient or necessary political targets.
None of the people you list were lynched.
I think you are referring to Emmet Sullivan.
Emmet Sullivan?
Publius: NO, we don’t ALL SEEM TO AGREE at all that prosecuting Trump would be frivolous, but you fell for that claim without even seeing an indictment, so maybe Turley gets a bonus. There’s no “zombie” case at all. As you can see, the decision to prosecute Trump involves threats of violence, accusations of malevolent intention, and lots of NYPD manpower to keep safe the prosecutor staff, investigators, court staff, the judges, the jurors, the witnesses, and others whom the deplorables might go after. THAT would be an overriding consideration–not whether Trump committed crimes and whether the justice system should treat everyone the same. The concept that no one is above the law is something all SHOULD agree on–why should Trump get a free pass by declaring his “candidacy” when he hasn’t been nominated and the election is over 2 years away? And, why do people like you fall for the argument about “political motivation” even before you see any charges, much less hear any evidence? You should take some self-inventory about why you believe all of this and why Trump should get a free pass. Turley doesn’t have any first-hand knowledge about what went on in the Manhattan DA’s office, but it is the case that Bill Barr told the federal DOJ prosecutors in NY to back off of multiple investigations of Trump, including the federal election crimes, but that doesn’t prove they would be frivolous. Trump is “runing for president” to create the argument that he would be a poor widdle victim of “political harassment” if he is indicted, no matter the facts. His premature announcement of his pending arrest was a play straight out of the 2020 playbook–announce even before the election that it is “rigged”– to set up the “stop the steal” backlash when he did lose. Why can’t you see this for the obviously desperate play that it is?
🤡
A good question has been raised.
Assuming the Grand Jury returns a True Bill and the Prosecutor seeks an Indictment AND the Judge grants it….what process will it take for Trump to be arrested, arraigned, if he remains in Florida and refuses to be Extradited?
There is far more to this than the media is discussing and that the DA is explaining.
If I were Trump….I stay at Mar-Lago, enjoy life, play golf, and carry on as normal while my legal team conducted my Defense against the charges.
So long as he does not set foot inside New York there shall have to be an Extradition Proceeding that succeeds in being forcibly removed to New York.
Do Florida Law Enforcement authorities have to conduct an arrest based upon a New York Indictment?
How long can Trump’s Legal Team drag this matter out if they want?
As bad as Palm Beach County is politically it is far more favorable turf for Trump than New York and Manhattan will be ever be.
Yet another stupid column pretending to know the charges, when he doesn’t know, all because he’s too impatient to just wait.
Its Bragg’s Grand Jury, and the structure of the case is public knowledge.
We have a State Prosecutor, with nothing in state law that supports the empaneling of a Grand Jury. Hence the attempt to piggy back on Federal law,(still out side SOL) to get the indictment.
At least this is an actual Grand Jury. Not the fairy tale one Georgia was forced to invent.
No, actually, we don’t know what has been presented to the grand jury.
You pretend to know, but you don’t know.
It seems everyone but you has an idea of what has been presented to the Grand Jury. Maybe you need to start thinking. Is that possible for you to do?
And, yet, this same “speculation” has been discussed in such fora – and the same conclusions drawn. Poor Professor Turley, decades as a constitutional law expert…
Here in Doublestandardstan we have to sit and watch as this radical, Soros DA lowers felonies to misdemeanors for VIOLENT criminals of a favored class, the criminal class, and then tries to shoehorn this misdemeanor that has lapsed into a felony due to it being a political opponent.
Never before have we seen such a politicization of our justice departments and it will be the ruination of our nation. Democrats are always willing to burn the village down in order to “save” it as long as it leaves them in power.
What is a “Soros DA”?
What is a “Soros DA”?
One who creates a revolving door for actual criminals, and a dungeon for political “criminals.”
Soros didn’t do that, so no, that’s not a “Soros DA.”
Anonymous don’t be an idiot! We all know that Soros has been getting radical DAs elected, you know it as well. Wow, what a tool!
Keep defending Soros DAs as you watch more and more Dems get eliminated due to high crime and a worried electorate. You lost the House because NY lost 5 Dems all due to crime.
Your and my opinions about who’s “radical” are different.
The murder rate in the 25 states that voted for Donald Trump has exceeded the murder rate in the 25 states that voted for Joe Biden in every year from 2000 to 2020. NY lost some Dem seats because of bad campaigns and the general tendency of swing voters to vote for the party not in the WH (though even that was significantly tamped down in 2022), not due to crime.
Anonymous – even if your proffered statistic is true, it is misleading. Inside “red” states, there are cities that a Democratic-controlled. For example, Tennessee is a “red” state, but Memphis is Democrat-run and has a high crime rate. If you compare Republican-run areas with Democrat-run areas in almost all states, crime will be higher in the latter and there will be more “woke” prosecutors.
Crime is higher in cities. Both red states AND blue states have cities, so don’t pretend that you can blame the higher crime rates in red states on blue cities, because THAT doesn’t account for the difference.
“If you compare Republican-run areas with Democrat-run areas in almost all states, crime will be higher in the latter”
I await your data. Make sure that it’s not just data about cities vs. non-cities.
For example, if you have data showing that cities run by Republicans have lower crime rates than cities run by Democrats, present it.
, if you have data showing that cities run by Republicans have lower crime rates than cities run by Democrats, present it.
Now that your phony metric of comparing “red STATES and blue STATES, was easily swatted away, you demand others do your work.
LOL that you think it’s my job to substantiate his claim.
You think your job is to lie and deceive.
Anonymous – of the top 50 cities listed by Wikipedia, only 11 have Republican mayors. The others are all Democrats, except for 3 Independants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_the_50_largest_cities_in_the_United_States None of the Republican-run cities show up on a Forbes list of the 15 most dangerous cities in America. https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegleybloom/2023/01/31/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-us-crime-in-america/?sh=5de924b54b25, which are: St. Louis, Missouri; Mobile, Alabama; Birmingham, Alabama; Baltimore, Maryland;
Memphis, Tennessee; Detroit, Michigan; Cleveland, Ohio; New Orleans, Louisiana; Shreveport, Louisiana; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Little Rock, Arkansas; Oakland, California; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Kansas City, Missouri; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. By contrast, 7 of the 36 Democrat-run cities show up on the Forbes list. How is that for a statistic?
“of the top 50 cities listed by Wikipedia, only 11 have Republican mayors”
So what? Your claim wasn’t about the 50 largest cities.
“None of the Republican-run cities show up on a Forbes list of the 15 most dangerous cities in America… which are …”
Some of those 15 cities aren’t even among the 50 largest, so of course they’re not going to show up. For example, the second city on your list of 15, Mobile AL, isn’t among the largest 50 and has a Republican mayor. I’m not going to check all of them, because — again — the discussion isn’t limited to the 50 largest cities OR the 15 most dangerous cities.
I asked you for proof for your claim “If you compare Republican-run areas with Democrat-run areas in almost all states, crime will be higher in the latter.” Either you can prove it about Republican-run areas and Democrat-run areas in general, or you cannot. My guess is that you cannot.
When we run the numbers and break the murders and criminality down into small groups, we find that it is the supporters of Democrats most responsible for these problems. I dislike doing so, but race is an important factor regarding these numbers. So in place of origin. Large cities that are under Democrat control add tremendous numbers.
One has to subtract people with no political affiliation.
When these and other numbers carefully are counted, we find that crime is largely a Democrat problem. Add to that the Democrat idea of defunding police and not convicting criminals.
Democrats and criminality are becoming more synonymous daily.
Boy are you uninformed.
“Soros didn’t do that . . .”
When you fund an arsonist, you did do that.
Bragg isn’t an arsonist.
Metaphorically Bragg and his office are starting fires all over the place. Why are you so blind?
And you still haven’t provided any evidence that Soros donated to Bragg’s campaign.
ATS, Soros peppers his money around many supposedly independent organizations that pepper what he gave to other organizations, all dependent on approval. You are repeating earlier errors discussed in the past.
A DA ( of which there are numerous) supported by the commie George Soros
Soros isn’t a “commie,” and AFAIK, Soros did not donate to Bragg’s campaign.
“AFAIK, Soros did not donate to Bragg’s campaign.”
Only some $1 million, not including donations from Soros’ son and wife.
I’ll wait for you to prove that Soros donated $1M to Bragg’s campaign.
ATS, I’ll wait for you to prove Soros didn’t act on behalf of the Nazis.
Those given $millions by Soros to get elected as prosecutors.
Soros didn’t give Bragg $millions.
Anonymous @12:30 pm. You probably missed yesterday’s Daily Mail (“George Soros’ man in the Manhattan DA’s office: Billionaire Dem donor funded Alvin Bragg’s campaign to the tune of $1million while he promised to put Trump behind bars”):
While campaigning to become the next Manhattan DA, he [Bragg] received more than $1million in support from the Color Of Change PAC, a racial justice group which receives funding from Soros, a Hungarian-born billionaire financier-turned American mega donor.
. . .
Soros has reportedly sunk at least $40million into electing liberal district attorneys.
. . .
Bragg is just one of at least 75 district attorneys Soros has backed in recent years as part of an ongoing campaign to reshape American society in his liberal vision.
. . .
Over the years Soros has thrown millions behind liberal DAs – either with outright donations or funneled through political action committees – effectively buying elections and leading to the installment of prosecutors who support his leftist agenda.
Soros has spent at least $40million on the project, according to Matt Palumbo, author of The Man Behind the Curtain: Inside the Secret Network of George Soros a minuscule sum for a man worth at least $32billion.
The billionaire’s DAs have stripped away bail laws and opted to forgo prosecuting crimes like theft and reckless driving, effectively giving criminals a free pass and leading to the breakdown of law and order across the United States.
Crime has since soared in major cities overseen by Soros’s DAs.
In 2021 under Kim Foxx’s reign, Chicago had the most murders it’s seen since 1994. And in Philadelphia, drug use and violent crime has seen a surge since Larry Krasner took office.
Color Of Change gets donations from lots of people. Color Of Change isn’t Soros. Crime in NYC hasn’t soared.
You apparently are ignorant of how things work.
So, if Soros funnels money through a 501c or some other entity, he is not “contributing” to a political candidate?
Does he control who the 501(c) donates to? No.
This shows you are ignorant to the facts of life and how humans behave.
“Crime in NYC hasn’t soared.”
That is a lie. As I’ve already shown you.
“Color Of Change isn’t Soros.”
Your deceptions and manipulations never cease.
Soros and CoC funnel money to pro-crime DA’s via what are called “pop-up PACs.”
It’s not a lie, and I don’t see where you showed that it’s false.
“Soros and CoC funnel money to pro-crime DA’s via what are called “pop-up PACs.””
I don’t know what a “pop-up” PAC is, and you’re already undermining your argument that Soros gave $1M to Bragg, since if Soros gave money to CoC, and CoC gave money to multiple people running for DA around the country, then if all of Soros’s money went to Bragg, it cannot have gone to any other DAs that CoC donated to. What percentage of Soros’s $1M went to Bragg and what percentage when to other DAs? What percentage went to things other than DA races?
Your accounting is faulty.
Also, your opinion that Bragg is “pro-crime” is only that, an opinion.
If its coming out of the mouth of ATS is is a lie until proven otherwise.
When Bragg’s office doesn’t prosecute criminals, he is pro-crime.
There’s the pedantry we expect from you.
As usual you are untrustworthy.
One has to laugh, except it is sad you lack so much knowledge.
💯
I’m replying to hullbobby – Dems will burn the village to stay in power.
I have great doubts about the case and it is very dubious legally. However I do not think that this is a slam dunk for Trump. His own big mouth has helped him snatch defeat from the jaws of victory frequently in the past. He will not hang on the cross like Christ forgiving his enemies and generating sympathy. His mouth won’t allow him to do so. I supported Trump in 2016 and 2020 but I am simply tired of his big mouth and actions causing trouble. The secret documents were a total unforced error which he handed to Biden and Merrick Garland, irrespective of Pence and Biden doing the same thing. Biden is incompetent and Pence is wishy washy but neither generate the hate that Trump generates so any legal shenanigans against him will generate far less sympathy than would be the case for less ego-centric personalities. The Georgia prosecution is again his own big mouth getting in the way. It seems he has never learned that there are other people and recording devices on the line when he talks.
I think Desantis was speaking the truth. Paying off a porn star is believable with Trump and his previous infidelities make it plausible he is guilty even if not true. Desantis has no power over this and stated that. Not really much else he could do. Desantis did not start the pot shots because they came from Trump (Big Mouth). Many of us are tired of the melodrama which Trump generates to no good effect. Yes I liked the policies very much especially compared to what we have now but we need “Speak softly and carry a big stick”. And then competence in picks for cabinet positions and lawyers because Trump was a disaster there.
Trump screams and yells but Desantis tends to cut his enemies off at the knees. His publicity group is reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s war room with no charge unanswered and usually with exceptional documentation. Not some rage filled tweet (Truth) with bad spelling.
Trumps problems are largely of his own making and he keeps on doing it.
I hear ya, GEB.
We have on the left, a bunch of wokesters who claim woke is a myth or that wokism only protects marginalized people. The reality is that the woke are real and loath traditional working-class and middle-class white people and wage a ceaseless legal and information war against them, justified by the fake oppression the wokesters claim exists.
The fantasy land of media and academia are the breeding grounds for this gaslighting ideology.
On the other side are many of these traditionalists who see Mr. Trump as their defender. The problem is that Mr. Trump is a walking declaration of war–understandable, given the opposition–but Mr. Trump is incapable of being anything else and building a broader coalition. Thus, he can’t peacefully resolve the dispute on behalf of the traditionalists.
Basically, both sides want war. Might not admit, but that’s what it is.
The solution is either the traditionalists embrace Desantis or the Democrats embrace moderation. Which happens first (if either) will determine what type of peaceful outcome prevails.
If neither happen, gird for conflict. My two cents, anyway.
I write all this having donated to Mr. Trump and enthusiastically voting for him in 2020. I finally realize he can’t solve the problem.
@GEB…
Actually it probably is…
Do you think Stormy was Trump’s first?
That he didn’t make these types of hush payments earlier?
Now I don’t know. But suppose he did. Long before running for office.
Kinda kills this was politically motivated.
Not to mention that Bragg not only has to suggest it, but has to prove it. If there was evidence of an earlier situation… that all goes away.
If you look at the Edward’s case. It was closer to being political since the payoff was done by a donor, not Edwards himself. While neither used campaign funds, there’s the issue Trump used his own funds. So less of a case against Trump.
Bragg has to tie this to the election. He can’t.
There’s more, which is why Jordan is calling on Bragg to testify.
Even if its behind closed doors… it will be interesting.
-G
Law Schools should be required IQ Tests as part of admission process so we would not have to deal with these situations.
the Federal government does indeed fund rioters, anarchists, insurrectionists or in a word: Democrats.
It is all a question of who the
Proud BoysANTIFA BLM protestors supportAuron MacIntyre
@AuronMacintyre
We’re in the “tax-payers fund the rioters” stage of anarchotyranny
As the regime prepares to arrest its most prominent political opponent on manufactured charges remember that they also directly fund domestic terrorism
May 31, 2020:
“At Least 9 Fires Set, 109 Arrested as Shops Are Looted in Philly Protests
Cars were flipped over, windows were broken and the city was locked down while police went after looters and fires were put out”
https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/hundreds-gather-at-philly-city-hall-for-george-floyd-demonstration/2413220/
Mar 21, 2023:
“Philadelphia to Pay $9.25 Million to Settle Suit by George Floyd Protesters”
The protesters said they sustained “physical and emotional injuries” in the response by city police to civil unrest after his murder in Minneapolis in 2020.
NYTinfoil Hat