Below is my column in Fox.com on the Trump indictment. There is a report of 34 counts against former President Donald Trump, which may be count stacking based on individual payments or documents. We will have to wait to see. In the meantime, the prosecution came about in the most overtly political way from Bragg campaigning on charging Trump to a public pressure campaign to indict from his former lead prosecutor.
Here is the column:
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has finally made history. He has indicted former President Donald Trump as part of an investigation, possibly for hush money payments. We are all waiting to see the text of the indictment to confirm the basis for this unprecedented act. But history in this case — and in this country — is not on Bragg’s side.
The only crime that has been discussed in this case is an unprecedented attempt to revive a misdemeanor for falsifying business documents that expired years ago. If that is still the basis of Thursday’s indictment, Bragg could not have raised a weaker basis to prosecute a former president. If reports are accurate, he may attempt to “bootstrap” the misdemeanor into a felony (and longer statute of limitations) by alleging an effort to evade federal election charges.
While Trump will be the first former president indicted, he will not be the last if that is the standard for prosecution.
It is still hard to believe that Bragg would primarily proceed on such a basis. There have been no other crimes discussed over months, but we will have to wait to read the indictment to confirm the grounds.
What we do know is the checkered history leading to this moment.
The Justice Department itself declined to prosecute the federal election claim against Trump. There was ample reason to decline.
The Justice Department went down this road before and it did not go well. They tried to prosecute former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on stronger grounds (which I also criticized) and failed. In that case, campaign officials and donors were directly involved in covering up an affair that produced a child.
At the time, Edwards’ wife was suffering from cancer. The prosecution still collapsed. The reason is that you need to show the sole purpose for paying hush money in such a scandal. For any married man, let alone a celebrity, there are various reasons to want to bury a sexual scandal.
For Trump, there was an upcoming election but he was also a married man allegedly involved in an affair with a porn star. He was also a television celebrity who is subject to the standard “morals clause” that’s triggered by criminal conduct or conduct that brings “public disrepute, scandal, or embarrassment.” These clauses are written broadly to protect the news organizations and their “brand.”
Various presidents from Warren Harding to Bill Clinton have been involved in efforts to hush up affairs. They also had different reasons for burying such scandals, including politics. However, scandals are messy matters with a complex set of motivations. Showing that Trump only acted with the future election in mind — rather than his current marriage or television contracts — is implausible. That was likely the same calculus made by the Justice Department.
That is also why the use of the “bootstrapping” theory as the primary charge would be an indictment of the prosecution and its own conduct. The office has already been tarnished by the conduct of the prosecutors who pushed this theory.
When Bragg initially balked at this theory and stopped the investigation, two prosecutors, Carey R. Dunne and Mark F. Pomerantz, resigned from the Manhattan DA’s office. Pomerantz then did something that some of us view as a highly unprofessional and improper act. He published a book on the case against Trump — a person who was still under investigation and not charged, let alone convicted, of any crime.
It worked. Bragg ran on his pledge to bag Trump and Pomerantz ramped up the political base to demand an indictment for a crime. It really did not matter what that crime might be.
While other crimes have not been discussed in leaks or coverage for months, it is always possible that Bragg charged Trump on something other than the state/federal hybrid issue in his indictment. There could be other business or tax record charges linked to banks or taxes. Ironically, the bank and tax fraud issues were also a focus of the Justice Department, which again did not charge on those theories. Moreover, Bragg could face the same statute of limitation concerns on some of the issues previously investigated by the Justice Department.
Finally, Bragg could stack multiple falsification claims to ramp up the indictment. There are reports of 34 counts of business record falsification. But multiplying a flawed theory 34 times does not make it 34 times stronger. Serial repetition is no substitute for viable criminal charges.
Bragg could have something more than the anemic bootstrapping theory — and it would be more defensible. Conversely, if Bragg moves primarily on that theory, the Democrats are inviting a race to the bottom in political prosecutions. That is something that we have been able to largely avoid in this country.
Bragg had a choice to make. He cannot be the defender of the rule of law if he is using the legal process for political purposes. That is what would be involved in a formal accusation based largely on the bootstrap theory. The underlying misdemeanor could pale in comparison to the means being used to prosecute it.
We have already watched the unseemly display of Bragg’s former lead prosecutor in publishing a book and publicly calling for charges during an ongoing investigation. Proceeding solely on the bootstrap theory would be a singularly ignoble moment for the Manhattan District Attorney.
What is clear is that whatever comes out of that gate next week, it will not just be Trump who will face the judgment of history.
370 thoughts on “The Trump Indictment: Making History in the Worst Possible Way”
You’re alleging federal crimes, not state crimes, so Bragg isn’t the right person to prosecute them. I’ve never told any prosector what/who to prosecute and find it strange that you believe “no one should be above the law” requires me to start doing so.
You are not making sense.
Melania has asked if she will have to testify against her husband in the first trial.
No, they said, not gonna be necessary.
She then asked..”can I testify against him anyway?”
“I don’t really care, do you?”
It’s refreshing to see that New York is now reversing itself in formerly ignoring most misdemeanor crimes and now fully prosecuting them despite the accused having left the state or if there are any questions concerning the limitation of actions. I look forward to all shoplifting, public intoxication, toll evasion, petty theft, malicious mischief, disorderly conduct type crimes being equally and zealously prosecuted. Broken windows policing is back and nobody can escape the long arm of the law. All crimes are being prosecuted with equal justice for all regardless of whom the victim or the suspect might be. Nobody will be singled out because of who they are. Do the crime, do the time.
Darren: Why has Professor Turley tried to invoke a statute of limitations issue here?
The NY Court of Appeals case, People v. Knobel, and the statute itself are very clear that it would toll for Trump. https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of-appeals/1999/94-n-y-2d-226-0.html
We can opine as to the substance of this charge all day (and I would agree!).
But, by drumming up a procedural controversy where there is none, I am afraid readers of this blog (and viewers of Fox News) will be deeply misled on this issue. Surely, Professor Turley is familiar with the SOL tolling exceptions in NY and this Knobel case, right?
the statute itself are very clear that it would toll for Trump
Not to exceed 5 years
Care to quote the whole sentence rather than five cherry-picked words from the statute?
Or do you prefer misrepresenting readers?
Have you seen the indictment yet? None of the rest of us have–so how do you know that Trump was charged only with misdemeanors? Or, are you following the alt-right tactic of trying to get out in front of adverse publicity before an event even happens? And where do you get off claiming that “most misdemeanor crimes” are ignored?
JFC. “the alt-right tactic of trying to get out in front of adverse publicity before an event even happens” LOLOL
Like the laptop leak that was practiced in Colorado months before the election…The right always controls the narratives…
Seriousl, just STFU
Clowns always project.
They may know because these “fake” and malicious charges have been considered for years – even before the statute of limitations ran – and they have been rejected multiple times by multiple and various authorities.
Can you say Alvin “Mike Nifong” Bragg?
What’s that mean, NUTCHACHACHA, “clowns?”
Oh, and may we rid ourselves of that illicit and unconstitutional affirmative action, etc., yet or do you still need it?
I thought the “Braggs” of this world worshiped “equity” and possessed a profound aversion to bias and favor.
1a: justice according to natural law or right
specifically : freedom from bias or favoritism
I read Turley’s article and watched an appearance on a Fox News panel this morning. In both places he presented a case without knowledge of the facts. He said only one potential crime has been discussed which is blatantly untrue. He dismissed the multiple counts as being “bootstrapping” suggesting all the counts are related to a single act. He talked about the “unprecedented nature” of the charging of a “former President,” both suggesting that Trump should be above the law which is nowhere in the Constitution. I would expect Turley to pick apart the indictment once he actually read it and knew what the charges were. That’s what partisans and Fox News commentators do, for pay in Turley’s case. What he’s doing now is telling his followers there’s nothing to see here which at best he doesn’t really know without knowing the facts involved. #Sad
Precisely. Without the substantive facts, he can only opine on procedural limitations to prosecution. But even, here, he is stating things that are blatantly untrue. Drumming up a statute of limitations controversy where there is one is ridiculous. He is fueling the “age of rage” based on legally bunk theories.
If he really thinks a NY Court of Appeals case, People vs Knobel, is no longer good law, he should at least state his case (rather acting like it doesn’t exist). Because without addressing it, Professor Turley is just creating conditions conducive to inciting an angry mob fueled by misunderstandings of the law.
Maybe the legislative branch can IMPEACH Real President Donald J. Trump again too, huh, counselor!
They should make it a tradition and IMPEACH Real President Donald J. Trump annually, you know, with fireworks.
And there’s never any cheating by democrats during any election, right, as we stare at it right before our very eyes – after States ignored their own constitutions in 2020.
See, I’m thinking quintuple+ jeopardy, how’s about you?
You goofed up and failed to prove your case.
If the tolling “was” the problem. Nothing has changed now.
If Bragg was unable to serve the indictment then, how did he do it now?
Besides, tolling cannot exceed 5 years.
There’s nothing inappropriate in writing about a case based on the facts as we know them so far — which have been out for years. “Barring any new revelations” is implied in any article on the matter. And I don’t think it a good idea to suspend commentary on government behavior. If there are new facts that change things, then I’m sure the good Professor will note that.
As it stands now, the government behavior doesn’t pass the smell test. Perhaps the smell will dissipate. But there is only one legal shenanigan I know of to convert this matter to a felony. So it isn’t very likely.
It’s fair to write on “facts as we know them so far” but it isn’t fair to inaccurately describe what the facts are for example that only one crime has been discussed. I’ve heard Turley himself discuss multiple possibilities. Turley is giving you false scenarios and telling you why they don’t matter.
BTW, If you smell nothing wrong in Trump’s behavior. You should get your nose checked.
All humans are flawed and do wrong things all the time. That happens to you me, and everyone else. However, in his presidential duties, Trump, compared to other Presidents, was a pretty straight arrow.
That is why you and others have so much difficulty showing significant things that Trump has done outside of his delegated powers. He is not pure, but the lack wasn’t reflected as much as it was with other Presidents.
That you might not like him or his policies is a different story.
A straight arrow? He doesn’t show up to the inauguration symbolizing the peaceful transfer of power after spreading election lies he knows were false.
It’s hard to out-due Hillary Clinton on the narcissist meter. But somehow he managed to do it.
“Trump privately admitted he lost 2020 election, top aides testify”
I don’t have any trouble speculating what Trump has done wrong based on public information, but I have no bneed to. The indictment(s) will spell it out, leaving out a lot for sure but I’ll start with the indictments. If you’re saying Trump was “pretty much a straight arrow” with the qualifier “in his Presidential duties,” there is no point discussing it with you.
“Trump was “pretty much a straight arrow” with the qualifier “in his Presidential duties,” there is no point discussing it with you.”
You walk away because you know what I said is true. You might want to go after Trump for things outside his Presidency. I’m tired debating those things with you because some of your statements were ludicrous and others wrong. I do not say Trump is perfect. Are you? No. Based on your record on this blog your comments have shown you to be quite imperfect and one who acts emotionally with the idea of vengeance for ‘crimes’ committed centuries ago.
I’m not walking away, just not letting you change the subject. Trump’s “imperfections” are about to lead to multiple felony indictments in at least three separate venues along with an ongoing civil suit for rape. That sounds pretty damn imperfect to me. You want me to prove something to your satisfaction which we know is impossible. I’ll let the Manhattan District Attorney, Fulton County District Attorney, and Special Counsel settle the debate. The Trump Organization already has 17 felony convictions, and his CEO is currently in jail. I don’t need to speculate, read the first indictment for yourself when it becomes available, consider that the first chapter in a novel.
“Trump’s “imperfections” are about to lead to multiple felony indictments in at least three separate venues”
The imperfections you see are your own. Based on your type of accusations, our entire population would be in jail. If we take them one at a time, beginning with the Bragg case, you can’t prove Trump did anything wrong, but one can see how Bragg is guilty of using his office politically even if no one charges him for doing so.
“You want me to prove something to your satisfaction “
All my satisfaction desires are reasonable proof, but you cannot lay out the details, the crime, and the evidence other than to make statements enhancing the ham in the ham sandwich the Grand Jury wants indictment for.
They did not charge Trump for any of these things. They fined the organization, and the CFO agreed to a plea deal. He was involved in all or almost all of the 17 questions that arose. There was a fine, not atypical for business in NY. They did not challenge it because it was penny-ante in proportion to the dollar value of the company (maybe a few pennies and a dollar or so).
You were or still are a realtor. If one were to go through the books of the realtor company and broker, I would be surprised if I couldn’t come up with 17 items that could be charged against the company, which according to your logic, would mean you are guilty.
I get you’d rather talk about me. You won’t find 17 felony convictions against my company or most corporations. There’s a separate civil trial starting in October naming Donald, Don, Jr, Eric, and Ivanka. These aren’t imperfect people, they’re criminals as the upcoming trials will bear out.
“I get you’d rather talk about me. You won’t find 17 felony convictions against my company or most corporations. “
All or almost all were packaged against the CFO. The reason felonies wouldn’t be found is that they don’t exist except if one is engaging in a political prosecution.
I gave you an example that I thought you would be smart enough to recognize, but you failed to do so.
If we closely examine the books, we will find the broker of your firm likely takes deductions or write-offs that do not follow the law. If you wish to debate that, you do not know very much. I can’t say about you, but others who work in the same field will have violations as well. This is common to most businessmen. Generally, such “errors” are pointed out, and there are fines.
If you don’t have any tax deductions or write-offs then perhaps your income tax forms are 100% Kosher. Where we deal with jail terms is when a person receives income and doesn’t report it. Even in that instance, very few are convicted.
Now that you might better understand taxes perhaps you will change your mind. That is doubtful.
These are political trials (or political acts), but you are in favor of them. That is your problem and that is what you complain about when you cry racism. Most racism that badly hurts individual groups is based on political actions something you seem to promote.
If you release all your tax forms to me I will be glad to review them and show where you too can be politically prosecuted.
You’ve gotten truly desperate in your deflection attempts. #Sad
Desperate? You are the one that doesn’t seem to know what is going on. That is why you can’t discuss them.
Next time the gas tank on your company car or the car you use for business is empty, you fill it up on the company’s dime or use gas as a write-off. Look at the tax laws, and you might find that you violated several. If the prosecutor wants to get you for tax fraud, he will become a contortionist as he did with Trump, go in front of a grand jury, and the next thing you find is an indictment. The reason that won’t happen to you but is happening to Trump is that there is a political reward for the prosecutor of Trump. In the end, Trump will win because he did nothing criminal, and the charges will be trumped up.
I have no need to discuss them with you, the proof will be in the proverbial pudding which in this case will be the courtroom. The 34 Class E felonies in Manhattan is the least of Trump’s worries. He won’t go to jail for those based on precedent. You should be worried about the Special Counsel who got testimony (and video) of Trump et. al. moving aroung boxes after they were subpoenaed with Trump personally deciding which classified documents to keep. He directed his lawyers to lie about giving everything back. The obstruction of justice is a slam dunk, but feel free to call me a likely criminal while ignoring an actual one.
“I have no need to discuss them with you, the proof will be in the proverbial pudding which in this case will be the courtroom.”
Right. Then you might get your jollies in a lower court until we reach a higher court that tells you the claim is BS. However, this case should never exist. It’s a political prosecution. That is why so many intelligent people have difficulty explaining the crime alongside the law and precedent.
Tell us what he did and what criminal law he broke. I don’t call you a criminal, except if I convict Trump based on your analysis of Trump.
Do you, at the very least, now know that some, if not all, people in your real estate office are violating IRS regulations?
You have become more and more amusing, though time consuming. If it’s any satisfaction to you. I don’t think he’ll go to jail over the Manhattan charges. White collar criminals in this situation rarely do. He does have to worry about jail in the special counsel investigation. I’m personally disappointed he won’t be handcuffed and have to take a mug shot but I’ll survive.
Enigma, I am glad you get some benefit out of what I say. I had hoped instead of amusing you, my explanation about taxes added a little knowledge so your inadequacies wouldn’t be so apparent.
” I don’t think he’ll go to jail over the Manhattan charges. ”
The world is relieved that you came to that conclusion. But why would Bragg want to create disorder other than to promote his political ambitions?
“I’m personally disappointed he won’t be handcuffed and have to take a mug shot but I’ll survive.”
It seems you are all about vengeance for acts that never occurred. A lot of Afro-Americans were hung because of such people, so you must have considered those hangings of some benefit.
Bragg charged crimes because Trump committed crimes. Is that the new criteria that we shouldn’t charge crimes because the defendant will urge violence and post pictures of him holding a bat behind the District Attorney? Putting out the address of the DA and criticizing his wife. Condemning the judge?
What acts charged do you imagine never occured? You are only worth engaging because I find your arguments ridiculous. You are also a waste of time so if this is the best you have, I’ll spend my time elsewhere.
.Enigma, you should be on Saturday Night Live. You support craziness without blinking an eye which makes things very funny unless you believe what you are writing.
This is the Stormy Daniels craziness destroyed on the blog. It is not some new charges pushed by ATS in his backward ways.
The bat is a funny twist to your comedy.
Thanks, Enigma for the laugh.
“I’ll spend my time elsewhere.”
Which comedy club are you headed for?
Wow, you are so brainwashed.
Why would add that last sentence?
Put me in this group:
“Justice Department ‘is irritated by Manhattan DA’s indictment of Donald Trump because they believe hush money charges are weak and could damage more serious Georgia electoral fraud and January 6 probes'”
The press and their 24-hour news cycle needed something to talk about. Long before the Manhattan case goes to trial, we’ll see the other indictments and we’ll be talking about the cumulative cases not just this one. The Manhattan case may not even be the first to go to trial.
This is an admission that the prosecutor is playing trial by headline.
– Professor Turley
I’m great full that I live in a country that allows a local DA to prosecute a former President. However just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should do it. Alan Dershowitz said he believes that Trump will be convicted at this level in New York City. That probably would happen this year. However in an appeals court he may be acquitted. That would happen next year during the general election. Next year could be very interesting. Providing ww3 doesn’t happen compliments of the American establishment.
Tulsi Gabbard’s take:
Tulsi who? Where in the world is he from? Who the —- cares?
George – Tulsi Gabbard in the last honest Democrat. She recently left the party. She would be the best Republican candidate we could find, if we could persuade her to run.
Bragg has set a precedent for prosecuting Biden and his entire kith and kin.
And apparently there is no need to wait for the corrupt DOJ. State prosecutors can act.
Perhaps not hard to work up criminal complaints against Clinton, Mayorkas, Wray, and Garland as well. Sedition, Obstruction of Justice, Lying Under Oath, destruction of evidence (with a cloth), the imagination soars. What are the statutes of limitations for crimes like Operation Fast and Furious or Operation Chokepoint???
Let’s all have fun!
Then those folks can ‘prove their innocence’ as Pelosi perceives our justice system…with a presumption of guilt that must be overcome by a defendant.
I wonder why the leftists celebrating Trump’s charges haven’t thought of that? Yet.
Lock him up
Nobody knows what the charges are yet. Trump will have a chance to prove his innocence in court. Let the system play out.
The play-out is throw-out as creative, frivolous and malicious prosecution.
– Professor Turley
“Trump will have a chance to prove his innocence in court.”
The ignorance we see on this blog. Trump doesn’t have to prove anything. The government has to prove guilt.
“The ignorance we see on this blog. Trump doesn’t have to prove anything. The government has to prove guilt.”
And Trump has to prove the government is wrong. Hence proving his innocence is his job. He has to defend himself against the charges by proving to a jury that he’s innocent of the charges.
I guess innocent until proven guilty is out the window.
I’m wondering how to tell MFG’d, Producers & Truckers to double/triple prices in Blue 3rd World Shi*t holes as they threat they are currently is almost to costly to deliver there!!!
Or just Refuse to do Biz there as they have a failed legal system.
Except for Hillary and Hunter.
I guess ignorance is bliss. The prosecutor has to prove guilt by providing evidence.
The prosecutor says X killed Y in the parlor at 8PM
If X can be shown to have been in the kitchen at that time, he is innocent.
Even ten year olds understand the game. Why don’t you?
March 31, 2023 at 7:05 PM
I guess ignorance is bliss. The prosecutor has to prove guilt by providing evidence.
Not in Fallin Blue Commie/Nazi Sh8ithole areas like DC, NYC, Cali, ChIraq, Houston, Memphis, etc..
People need to stay out of those areas & stop doing any/All Biz with those Evil Azzholes F*ggot Pedos!
Tell your Gov/State Legs. to stop dealing with them wherever possible.
A defendant has a presumption of innocence that must be overcome by the state, which has the burden of proof.
It is possible to have a criminal case dismissed after the state rests if the state has failed to present a prima facie case. The defense has no obligation to prove anything.
I have won several times that I can immediately recall without having to put on any evidence at all. One time my client had signed a confession to a burglary and the confession was admitted into evidence. However, the homeowner failed to testify and the state couldn’t show that a burglary had actually occurred and I wasn’t going to help them with that. A confession without corroboration isn’t sufficient to convict someone of a crime. Case dismissed.
Trump may not have to prove anything. Bragg seems like an incompetent. Biden, who genuinely seems incompetent, at least has enough of his wits about him not to like this precedent.
I wonder who or what is really running this country?
Maybe somebody invented Artificial Stupidity and set it loose.
OT: Yet there are those that deny election problems.
Over 8,000 mail ballots rejected in Nevada’s 2022 election, greater than Senate race victory margin
More than 8,000 mail ballots were rejected by officials in Nevada’s 2022 midterm election, which is greater than the margin of victory in the U.S. Senate race that determined the upper chamber’s majority.
Perhaps it is time for people to read a little history and see how Hitler actually came to power.
It was not by violent revolution.
Institutions are only as good as the people who control them . . . .
“Politics is a pendulum
Whose Swings between
Anarchy and Tyranny
Are fueled by perpetually
NO SWINGS AT ALL – THE GREATEST DOCUMENT FOR SELF-GOVERNANCE IN THE HISTORY OF MAN
“It’s the [Constitution], stupid!”
– James Carville
The Constitution and Bill of Rights are conservative. Conservatives have failed to maintain the necessary discipline to maintain the conservative Constitution and Bill of Rights. It starts with the severely restricted vote, which implements an infinitesimal government which allows for the dominion of the literal clear and evident, meaning and intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The greatest document for self-governance in the history of man gave Americans the one and only thing of any value it could. It gave them freedom, which can only exist in self-reliance. One man, one vote democrazy IS the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
The Constitution, like the Ten Commandments, was written to stand in perpetuity.
It should be precisely the same today.
I could give a toss about Trump, but the mess this is going to create . . . for ****’* sake, it is going to be very, very difficult to clean up, for a very, very long time. Our modern left are reckless, they are inscrutable, they are insane. They do not see the trap they have lain for themselves, and there doesn’t seem to be a damn thing we can do about it. Hold onto our first and second amendments, and speak up for them – they are quite literally the only things holding us in check at present. These people have crossed the Rubicon. Let it not be a literal repeat of that era. We are living in very dark times, since covid, and since Biden took office. Possibly the darkest we have ever faced as a nation, and it is entirely, 100%, the modern left’s fault, along with their globalist enclave. All because Hillary didn’t win in 2016. Wrap your head around that if you have the time and patience. Google pictures of young Hillary and Soros if you must. None of this is an accident or a ‘natural evolution’.
James, Trump brought this onto himself. That’s the one thing every trump supporter or “non-supporter” keeps ignoring. He’s being held accountable for his lying, falsification of documents and obstruction of investigations.
His hubris and narcissism did him in. Trump supporters love making excuses for him because apparently he’s not accountable to anyone. That’s how cults work and that’s how dictators hold on to power. Trump and his supporters love authoritarian leadership. They want it. But without the responsibility for the consequences.
The cult does not care one bit for elections, law and order, or any checks and balances. They are pro-autocratic anti-democratic. And the evidence piles up higher and higher everyday. They support a disgraced twice impeached ex-president that has called for the termination of the constitution, and they love him more than ever.
Wow, you are one brainwashed idiot.
And by idiot I mean: dumbed down, uninformed, misinformed, and lied to — as evidenced by the utter nonsense you write.
Who is in a cult, again?
Mission accomplished for the left.
FishCult: You mention law and order. Tell us about Democrat-run “Sanctuary Cities.”
Is it possible to have an IQ less than 0?
Then tell us about Democrat-run cities and states with their selective prosecutions…
Then tell us about Democrat-imposed authoritarian mandates including lockdowns, forced masking of children as young as 2, mandated experimental shots against your own conscience…
Indictment, like impeachment is an accusation.
Without conviction, innocence is presumed.
You cultists on the left, as evidenced by your Dear Leader Pelosi, assume guilt — which is a perversion of our legal system.
Tell us again about law and order.
“It’s amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites.”
— Thomas Sowell
Trump brought the Georgia election investigation and the documents investigation on himself — either through ineptitude, nefarious intent, or a combination of both. But this is an abuse of power by Bragg. You don’t misuse the judicial system because the target is less than admirable. It is more important than ever to double check yourself when the target is not sympathetic. I suspect Bragg didn’t bother to even do that. This is a calculated move that he thinks enhances his political career. I don’t why he thinks that. But that is the most likely explanation to me.
The headline of this FOX-purchased piece should be amended to read: “Donald Trump ,made history in the worst possible way”–beginning with cheating his way into power, despite losing the popular vote, setting a record for low approval ratings, trashing our economy–the worst recession since the Great Depression; alienated our EU and NATO allies, sided with a murderous dictator whom he praised as a “genius” for invading Ukraine, getting impeached twice, fomenting an insurrection and committing various other crimes, like stealing classified documents and lying about returning all of them, and now, the Stormy Daniels matter
Turley says: “The Justice Department itself declined to prosecute the federal election claim against Trump. There was ample reason to decline.” Yeah; Turley, but you left our the FACT that Billy Barr commanded that the Trump prosecution be dropped–despite the fact Michael Cohen had been successfully prosecuted for the same offenses. Trump is described as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Turley also says: “The Justice Department went down this road before and it did not go well. They tried to prosecute former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on stronger grounds (which I also criticized) and failed. In that case, campaign officials and donors were directly involved in covering up an affair that produced a child.” Yeah, Turley, but you failed to mentin that John Edwards didn’t have a well-earned reputation as an arrogant crook, grifter, liar and womanizer. He was a very successful personal-injury attorney who got involved with a campaign staffer who got pregnant.. He had lost a son to an accident at age 16 when the Jeep he was driving on a coastal highway was blown over during a storm. His wife was suffering form breast cancer, too, probably the result of fertility drugs to produce additional children after they lost Wyatt. And, the jury hung on one count, but acquitted on several others, so it wasn’t exactly the failure you try to portray it to be–at least one or more jurors voted to convict. At any rate, the public perception of John Edwards is light years away from that of Trump.
Turley says:”Showing that Trump only acted with the future election in mind — rather than his current marriage or television contracts — is implausible. That was likely the same calculus made by the Justice Department.The reason is that you need to show the sole purpose for paying hush money in such a scandal. For any married man, let alone a celebrity, there are various reasons to want to bury a sexual scandal.For Trump, there was an upcoming election but he was also a married man allegedly involved in an affair with a porn star.” Yeah, Turley, you’re never going to sell the idea that Trump’s third marriage exists for any reason other than show. And, Stormy wasn’t the only outside piece Trump tapped, either. That’s where David Pecker’s involvement comes into play. Pecker is the publisher of the “National Enquirer”, and reportedly engaged in “catch and kill” for Trump–giving money to women he had sexual liaisons with in exchange for a contract for exclusive rights to publish their story–only to never publish the story. It’s called “hush money”.You also do not have any basis for speculating as to why your pal, Billy Barr, commanded that the prosecution of Trump be dropped, other than for political reasons. Barr is proven to be a liar for Trump–he got out ahead of the release of the Mueller Report and lied about the findings, claiming that Trump had been exonerated, which was a lie.
Turley as a lawyer and law professor, you know that there are multiple safeguards in place to protect Trump, including the burden of proof being beyond a reasonable doubt and use of the grand jury to vet the validity of the prosecution. You should use your platform to advocate for the rule of law and respect for our judicial system–instead you side with Trump without even knowing what the charges are, much less the quantum and quality of evidence that supports them. Turley claims: “Bragg had a choice to make. He cannot be the defender of the rule of law if he is using the legal process for political purposes.” Turley, the same can be said of you.
Has Hunter Biden been indicted yet? Let us know, because as you know, NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. Not even Democrats are above the law. No way, Jose.
So many misstatements of fact in this screed… hard to know where to begin.
List just one.
Do you know what Anarcho-tyranny looks like?
It looks like Joe Biden’s America.
The correct way to understand the Trump indictment is this: It is the biggest act of Election Interference in U.S. history.
We now live in a post-constitutional America. We now live in Biden’s Banana Republic.
And these authoritarian communists are just warming up.
+ 100 Gigi
We have been through all of this before.
Do I need to itemize the massive errors in each of your unfounded claims ?
Right now – the WORLD not just the US is a mess.
A small part of that was the inevitable consequences of Covid no matter who was in power or how it was responded to.
But the vast majority of that mess is DIRECTLY the result of Bad Choices by the largest economy in the World – the US.
And MOST of those bad choices were under Biden.
We have spent money we do not have and printed it by the boatload.
We have inflated not only our own economy, but that of the world.
In fact do to our enviable position as the most afluent and powerful country in the world,
not only does everything we do impact the world, but in many cases it impacts the world WORSE than the US.
You rant that Biden has restored the
US image with the rest of the world. Then why are we in the midst of a global realignment that is increasingly anti-western ?
China, India, Russia, South America, and the Mid East are ALL increasingly hostile to US interests.
The Saudi’s have a worse relationship with the US than possibly ever in history.
Biden practically the architect of the Iran deal has essentially turned his back on it – because Iran is more ferverently anti-US than ever.
Because the Iran deal was OBVIOUSLY always a bad idea.
The US has more forces in Syria under Biden than under Trump – weren’t we getting out of Syria ?
It may have more forces in Syria now than there were in Afghanistan in 2020.
So much for getting out of the mideast.
The war in Ukraine was avoidable. Yet, Biden did everything possible to bring it about.
And that war combined with other abyusmal left wing nut policies of the biden administration,
Leave the global forces for evil stronger, and those for good weaker.
The last time the US unleashed inflation on the world, the mideast went up in flames.
Now we are coupling US amplified global inflation with global food shortages.
Soon enough the conflict with Russia could be the least of our worries.
When was the last time a foreign govenrment made a video openly mocking a US president ?
Biden is the only US president with that distinction.
Here’s just one item as food for thought, for those who would try to claim that the Stormy Daniels pay-off wasn’t politically-motivated. The encounter happened in 2006–near the time of or right after Barron was born. The pay-off happened 10 years later–when Trump ran for president. So, if the payoff was to save his 3rd marriage, you’d think that it would have happened near the time he lured Ms. Daniels to his hotel room on the pretext of financing her as a film producer, instead of ten years later–right before the 2016 election. That’s why that lie won’t fly.
Are you listening ?
I DO NOT CARE IF IT WAS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.
THAT DOES NOT MAKE IT A CRIME.
You keep CONSTANTLY coming back to this stupid argument that a legal act becomes illegal because of a motive you do not like.
That is just plain stupid.
I would separately note that people’s motives are rarely if ever simple.
You say that this was obviously political because Trump was running for president.
At the same time – Trump had no reason to fear that the Daniels affair would surface and damage his business or his relationship to Melania until he chose to run for president.
Put differently – your claim that this is obviously political because of the timing is FALSE.
Nothing is obvious.
And you keep ranting that things you are merely guessing about are lies.
I would remind you of the wisdom of Christ sitting in judgement over mankind.
Jesus purportedly god and all knowing does not judge us based on our intentions, on our motives, on our hearts.
God judges us based on our Actions.
When we make something a crime, we are empowering government to use FORCE to punish that crime.
That is why Crimes are ACTS – not thoughts, not motives.
If there is ONE motive for an act that is legal, then the act is ALWAYS legal.
One of the largest moral failures of the modern left – and occasionally the right, is the arrogant presumption that they can see into the souls of others,
know why they did what they did, and attempt to judge them based on that idiotic claim to be able to read the souls of others.
almost 50% of democrats already believe this case is politically motivated.
More than 70% of independents.
Here is another famous mug shot from one of many political prosecutions by past democrats.
How did that work out for you ?
“Never Interfere With an Enemy While He’s in the Process of Destroying Himself.”
Has anyone claimed that whatever occured with Daniels was not consensual ?
If not why is any of it your business ?
Those of you on the left seem to beleive you are free to perv children. but that consenting adults can not do as they please ?
The only person whose business this was is Melania.
You live in a left wing nut bubble of Trump Derangement.
up is down and down is up.
Turley is not a DA. He is a law professor.
He does not excercise actual public power.
The left wing nuts engaged in all this nonsense.
And it goes Far beyond Trump are responsible for the idiocy they engage in.
Not those who oppose them.
Correction: Edwards’s son who died was “Wade” not “Wyatt”.
Gigi is ~Natasha, nay, NUTCHACHACHA, distinctly not Gigi.
He’ll have the chance to prove his innocence. That’s what due process is all about, right?
Did you mean Bragg?
Or were you just being sarcastic and mimicking Pelosi?
Since when does an American citizen have to prove his innocence? Oh, I forgot.
Trump has one of the best press secretaries in the world. The Democratic Party.
When are actual Americans, who are conservative just as the Constitution is conservative, going to engage the enemy?
Where the —- are George Washington et al. when America needs them?
The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) are the direct and mortal enemies of the American thesis, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, America and Americans.
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
A lot of Trump supporters and those claiming “not” to be trump supporters are really going nuts over the idea that a person can be indicted for crimes. That must be a shock to their fragile minds. Trump has been accused of committing multiple crimes, not just in NY but also GA and as president. NY’s case is pretty weak, but still enough to indict. Georgia is stronger and as Turley acknowledged a lot harder to defend. Then there’s the DOJ’s case which is virtually guaranteed to land prison time. Turley as said nothing about that case and it seems Smith has way more evidence that needed to convict but is making sure that everything that can be corroborated will be. His lawyer has lost the ability to use attorney-client privilege because Trump lied to his lawyers and used them to knowingly obstruct justice. That is much more serious and it opens Trump up to being in prison. Ironically he will still be able to run his campaign from prison if he chose to.
There is already illegal attempts to interfere in the NY case by Republican Jim Jordan. He’s demanding that Bragg testify before his committee to talk about the evidence against Trump. Turley should know that is certainly a gross violation of separation of powers. This shows the extent to which Republicans will go to defend Trump like blind adherents in a cult. When Fox News is facing a certain expensive defamation case and we know that they are purposefully lying to their viewers because they need those gullible MAGA idiots and the mentally weak to keep their ratings up we know that even Fox News is fully aware that Trump is a compulsive liar who cannot be trusted. That is why he is facing multiple criminal investigations for his criminal activities. It’s not a matter of “if” he will go to prison, It’s only a matter of when.
I am not a Trump supporter. Dershowitz isn’t a Trump supporter, nor is Turley.
Yet what we all have in common is that we believe in the law and that this is definitely prosecutorial misconduct.
Of course its still speculation until the indictment is revealed.
Bragg should be disbarred for this.
Pelosi should be forced to resign over her comment.
Yes its that outrageous.
“the greatest threat to justice is an unscrupulous prosecutor who picks a person to pursue and then scours the law books to pin some offense on him.”
You are making very bizzare arguments.
I have defended the Nazi’s and KKK when their rights are violated – of course AI will defend Trump.
Though frankly the Trump case is unique.
I hope that Trump loses at most every step in the process.
I want that because it makes YOU look bad.
I want the problems of corruption within our judiciary and justice system brought out in front of all of us.
I want them on display most egregiously.
That will not stop me from pointing out the stupidity of this nonsense.
But I would appreciate – and I suspect others here would also if you would quit the idiotic mind reading nonsense.
Like Bragg you claim to know what Trump is thinking. Infact you have cribbed 1984 and are litterally claiming thought crime.
You also arrogantly claim tho know what everyone else is thinking – and feeling.
You are abysmal with the law and facts – why would anyone expect you can devine the feelings and thoughts of others.
Can Trump be indicted ? Certainly, he just was.
Proving to the entire country the dangerous of the unscrupulous conduct of those with power in government.,
Trump can be indicted – anyone can be indicted – a crime is not necescary – according to you and to Bragg – we need not be told what crime we have committed.
You Revel is your own stupidity. You do not seem to grasp that
when anyone can be indicted on this weak tea – that is a threat to Everyone.
No one may be above the law – but no one is safe – except possibly actual criminals from the likes of you and Bragg.
The Bill of rights is not something you are supposed to try to game.
Yet you are proud of doing exactly that.
As is typical you talk out your ass.
How can Jordan be illegally interfering and Bragg not be illegally interfering ?
Jordan is not the one seeking to violate another persons rights.
You do not seem to grasp that Government – Bragg has no rights.
Regardless, Jordan has been careful regarding his demands.
I would further note that YOU opened the door to this by all the politically motivated subpeona’s and prosecutions of Trump.
Goose meet gander.
Regardless, at the barest minimum The House is entitled to knwo any involvement of the federal government in a local prosecution.
You demonstrated how serious a problem that was with Faux impeachment #1.
Jordan is free to go through Bragg’s office to see if any were influenced by the federal government.
So that impeachment proceedings can begin.
I would further note that local and state prosecutors testify before congress – sometimes subpeonad all the time.
It has happened in the past week.
MAGA voters are guilible ?
Look in the mirror.
79% of the people in this country know a political prosecution when they wee one.
YOU don’t. Are you claiming almost 80% of the country is guilible. ?
It’s been a very long time since my criminal pro class. Could the defense file a motion to quash, based on the statute of limitation issues, and if successful, follow with a suit for malicious prosecution?
As I understand it from reading TNYT, no. Under State of New York law the timee limittations do not run whle the accused is out-of-state.
Tolling cant extend past 5 years
Nancy Pelosi Sums Up TDS, Says Donald Trump Has A ‘Right To Prove His Innocence’,
The most anti-American thing, anti-justice thing to say.
And a telling glimpse into the leftist mindset.
The democrats don’t cheat. The election is not rigged. Oh, hell no! 2020 was not fixed. The 2024 presidential campaign begins with the arrest of the leading republican candidate.