‘Underwhelming’: Reactions to Trump’s Arraignment Shows It’s a Nothingburger
“There’s a curious omission in the Donald Trump indictment and statement of facts – The specific federal law Trump violated.”
Former President Donald Trump was arraigned on 34 counts of falsifying business records.
Except…
You lost people, Alvin Bragg. Everyone knows this is a nothingburger.
Think about how weak a case against Trump has to be for even Millhiser to view it with skepticism. What Bragg did here, just to get his 2 minutes in the sun, was indefensible. pic.twitter.com/s5DIMHUhAK
— AG (@AGHamilton29) April 4, 2023
BREAKING: CNN calls Trump indictment “underwhelming.”
You know you’ve lost when you lose CNN.pic.twitter.com/uc02V31yHT
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) April 4, 2023
Even John Bolton recognizes that this is a bogus case. Bolton just said he is "extraordinarily distressed" by the indictment and it is "even weaker than I feared it would be and I think it's easily subject to being dismissed or a quick acquittal for Trump." pic.twitter.com/zPEAaCjAhR
— MAGA War Room (@MAGAIncWarRoom) April 4, 2023
This is the sloppiest statement of fact I’ve ever seen in a major case. These are meant for reporters and non lawyers to lay out the case. This thing is clear as mud.
— Sarah Isgur (@whignewtons) April 4, 2023
After reading DA Bragg’s indictment of Trump and accompanying statement of facts, I’m stunned any prosecutor would move forward with this. It’s even flimsier than we were led to believe. Thirty-four stacked counts, bootstrapped to an unstated crime, to manufacture felony charges.
— Justin Amash (@justinamash) April 4, 2023
MSNBC legal expert (fmr deputy AG) admits D.A. Bragg’s claims were rejected by Merrick Garland bc they are “relatively trivial and insignificant.”
Then scrambles to convince panel Trump is nonetheless terrible. pic.twitter.com/I4CiAT5n8h— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) April 4, 2023
Underwhelming is almost generous. Amateur hour from Bragg, who is only doing this to get a gold star from his base for at least trying. Amazing how many legal analysts — including those not fans of Trump — who say this case is beyond weak. https://t.co/sOvatdaPfW
— Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) April 4, 2023
But the whole thing is a farce. An absolute farce.
I just started law school and I even know it’s all a joke. To not put the facts in your indictment is exactly what you’re NOT supposed to do.
Bragg indicted a former president for the first time ever.
The former president is running for office again.
Bragg refused to include the legal basis for the felony in the unprecedented indictment.
He bragged at his press conference he didn’t have to.
Are you kidding us???
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) April 4, 2023
Bragg’s spent his entire tenure on this indictment & it’s total amateur hour. Pick a paralegal at random & they could assemble something more professional https://t.co/p9PKFuE7MV
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 4, 2023
These charges are literally just disagreements over bookkeeping. Complete farce. Was this really worth destroying the judicial system over? https://t.co/rqj1FRZGYR pic.twitter.com/qFHhkTegXe
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 4, 2023
There's a curious omission in the Donald Trump indictment and statement of facts –
The specific federal law Trump violated. pic.twitter.com/bsM32x4jhn
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) April 4, 2023
There's a curious omission in the Donald Trump indictment and statement of facts –
The specific federal law Trump violated. pic.twitter.com/bsM32x4jhn
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) April 4, 2023
"Is the indictment of your predecessor politically divisive?"
BIDEN: *laughs* pic.twitter.com/YGDdBxE0iW
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 4, 2023
To avoid losing the trust of the American public, it is important that our justice system pursue Democrats and Republicans with equal vigor.
Whichever party most puts justice before nepotism is the one that deserves trust.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 4, 2023
Alvin Bragg has shut down the entire city, called up 38,000 NYPD police officers, closed down the FDR Drive and is spending an estimated $200 million of city funds, all for a $130,000 NDA. I never thought I would see this level of corruption in the United States.
— Eric Trump (@EricTrump) April 4, 2023
Per @NBCNews: Next Trump court date: December 4th. Proposed trial start date: January 2024.
At the very beginning of the GOP presidential primary calendar
— Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) April 4, 2023
NY law stipulates one can only be guilty of a falsifying business records felony "when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof."
Who did Trump allegedly defraud? No answer from Bragg!https://t.co/5oB04SIUO1
— Tiana Lowe (@TianaTheFirst) April 4, 2023
He postin’ pic.twitter.com/BSply5McJW
— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) April 4, 2023
SUPERCUT!
Media spread fake news Trump's being charged w/ "conspiracy" pic.twitter.com/2JePw5hSsd
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 4, 2023
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Since these so called crimes occurred when the business was in Trust, how can he be charged. Sounds like they filed against the wrong organization.
The way I see it, that account, The Donald J Trump Revocable Trust, was a personal not a business account. His Lawyer alluded to that when on a recent appearance on Hannity
Exactly. Even though the Trump organization may have provided bookkeeping services to Trump and to his revocable trust and kept records for them, these were not “business records” of the Trump Organization, nor were they “business records” of Trump or of the Trump Revocable Trust since they are not businesses. If the are not business records, the cannot be “false business records” under the statute whether or not they are false. Motion to dismiss granted.
As an example, if i buy illicit drugs and pay my drug dealer for them with a check from my Bank of America account and put “lawn services” rather than “cocaine” in the memo section of the check to hide my illegal purchase this would not become a “false business record” subject to the statute simply because the bank, a business, cashed the check and kept a copy in their records.
I am small time compared to Trump. I don’t make the entries into my accounting software.
Does anyone think Trump does?
Accounting clerk sees a check written to a lawyer.
Bookkeeping entry:
Legal Exp
ledger #52651
Note that the law uses the phrase “or causes”. If you send bogus information to your accountant then you caused the false business records. (The accountant is protected from this scenario by another section of the law.)
SECTION 175.05
Falsifying business records in the second degree
Penal (PEN) CHAPTER 40, PART 3, TITLE K, ARTICLE 175
§ 175.05 Falsifying business records in the second degree.
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree
when, with intent to defraud, he:
1. Makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an
enterprise; or
2. Alters, erases, obliterates, deletes, removes or destroys a true
entry in the business records of an enterprise; or
3. Omits to make a true entry in the business records of an enterprise
in violation of a duty to do so which he knows to be imposed upon him by
law or by the nature of his position; or
4. Prevents the making of a true entry or causes the omission thereof
in the business records of an enterprise.
Falsifying business records in the second degree is a class A
misdemeanor.
“So They Try and Beat Us Through the Law’”
Isn’t this Color of Law?
You could indict a ham sandwich and Alvin Bragg campaigned on doing this.
Indictments mean only that the prosecutor wants an indictment the Grand Jury is a vestigial institution.
These charges have no chance of sticking.
Someone should send Bragg 34 ham sandwiches. Probably a light snack for him.
And the NY judicial machine would likely uphold it. And the federal court would wait until the ham trial is over before reviewing it.
Next court date is right at the beginning of the GOP Presidential Primaries eh? How is this not purely political again? Not to mention that is several months from now sooooooo: the right to a speedy, fair trial?
Let’s hope this case gets tossed quick once it resumes.
Mary? You just started law school??? Tell us more!
Please contain your sarcasm. I like Mary’s work—please lay off.
That was not meant to be sarcasm!
It’s exciting to hear someone who’s already established in life starting law school. It’s refreshing as opposed to the young entitled Gen Z brat that think the law is about how they feel don’t you think??
Strange that people somehow took it that way. Seemed sincere and congratulatory. Also curious about the fist year experience.
Not gonna lie…I do have a ton of sarcasm in me. That might be why.
You’ve seen it at least a couple times I am sure!
She said so in the write up.. I thought that was pretty cool..
Daniels received $130,000 and has to pay out over $600,000. She’s apparently gloating today over the indictment.
As for the whole farce, a black day for America, but now the crosshairs may be directed at others more appropriately. A new norm is established.
Hey Stormy! That’s a lot of bl*w jobs and stretched wrecktum to put together that kinda of money. Hmmmm. You get $130,000, allegedly from Trump – yet you have to pay Trump $600,000
That’s not exactly a win for you.
Did you have to bl*w Alvin to get him to do your dirty work? Apparently, Avanasty wasn’t effective enough.
It’s just as pathetic as expected.
Where are all the RINO idiot ‘well nobody should be above the law’ crew now? Maybe they can point to the spot in the indictment where it actually includes the law he’s allegedly violated.
Everybody knew this was going to be pathetic, and a whole bunch of them went along with it because they were THAT desperate to finally Get Trump.
Bragg should lose his law license, if there is any justice anymore.
He should be given the same end as the real Beria
Will settle for the law license and be happy.
“Show me the man, I’ll show you the crime! Wait,,,wait,,, I had it somewhere..around here…… excuse me … well … I don’t have to show it to you now… .but just wait!
“Release the quarken!”
Good to know that Soros is getting real professionalism and genuine value for all his money.
Soros is getting exactly what he wants. Law and order is being destroyed in cities around the country and more of his imps keep getting elected. He doesn’t give 2 shits about how they act, because the press protects them and, by extension, him.
It is time to take off the gloves and fight back. Let’s begin in Arkansas. Sarah Huckabee’s AG should announce his investigation into the Clinton Foundation empaling a grand jury to look into books, records, payments, illegal donations and sources of income. Let’s go find a crime!
Was Bragg that anxious to stick it to Trump? Or is it just his AFFIRMATIVE ACTION bonafides clearly shining through?
You’d think that for a million dollars, Soros coulda done better
Amen!
Well, Affirmative Action hires is scraping from the bottom of the barrel.
The latter. BA and JD from Harvard. Let’s ask what his SAT and LSAT scores were
Apparently asking for those or having any expectation of adequate performance is now raaaccist….
Harvard admitted pathetic whiner David Hogg – Harvard no longer commands respect.
This reminds me of the time they implemented the nuclear option in the Senate.
It’s a nothingburger, but he still could face prison because you can easily rig a jury at all levels of government to put him away. He’s too polarizing.
Unfortunately, the only remedy is to start indicting Democrats.
Start CONVICTING democrats – FIFY.
Bragg has violated every canon of attorney ethics by abusing his power as a prosecutor and bringing charges that are clearly unsupported by both facts and the law. In a just and sane world, Bragg would be promptly referred for state Bar disciplinary proceedings and disbarment.
Considering that the judge involved has a history of making campaign contributions against Trump, and that this is Manhattan where I think maybe 12% of the vote was for Trump; if they do NOT get a rapid change of venue then the process is the punishment. They do not have to get a conviction for a victory, merely to delay matters so that it screws up the primary campaign. In that case, there is no reason to worry about the legal nonsense that comprises the indictments.
If the Left is real lucky, they will end up with another GOPe collaborator as the Republican candidate.
Subotai Bahadur
If they don’t give a change of venue then prison will probably be the punishment. I am unsure of the fairmindedness of a Manhattan jury in this case.
A Republican in NYC can and will be sent to prison for breathing… a Democrat can be on video committing murder and get off
We knew it was absurdly flimsy but when the prosecutor refuses to articulate the specific underlying crime needed to bootstrap this entire case to felony status and instead stacks the counts in the indictment it becomes laughably absurd.
They should have tanked the grand jury instead. That way they get their d/prog base riled up about ‘orange man bad’ with lots of publicity and fundraising. Instead they went through with this farce. There will be tit for tat in the future at some point and I am not listening to any crying when that day comes or moaning about ‘norms’. They chose this path and now they can damn well walk it.
I don’t know much about the subject but if a DA is going to indict someone doesn’t he have to tell that person what it is for? It obviously is not the misdemeanors but that is all he listed.
Bragg did list out the alleged NY State violations however the statute of limitations seems to have run out on them w/o being linked to another alleged violation which might bootstrap the misdemeanors up to a felony and thus lengthen the statute of limitations.
Bragged failure to specify the particular criminal violation he is attempting to link in order to perform this magic trick is very telling. IMO, it reveals that he knows he probably can’t sustain this indictment to a conviction and it is all for show. As a legal matter this is Cray cray. As a political matter it works to paint another allegation on Trump. Longer term though Trump is likely to walk and a very bright line has been crossed in using the legal system process itself as a form of political punishment v candidates. Tit for tat will come and there will be consequences someday.
This. He doesn’t have to specify the “other crime” at this time, but if it were anything substantial he would. The fact that he chooses to exercise his right not to specify means it’s flimsy, as we already knew.
This whole investigation has been frivolous from the beginning. Not facially frivolous, since the laws he’s alleging Trump violated actually exist, which probably makes it one step better than the Georgia investigation, but frivolous once you look at it up close.
Judge Napalatano (sp) said on the radio that the statute of limitations in NY can start and stop – I think he called it “tolling?” It can stop when Trump left the state. And Cuomo signed an executive order suspending the statute of limitations during COVID, which according to the judge, is a peculiar part of NY law. So if the first act charged was in Feb 2017, and Trump was in the White House 2017-2020, according to this theory, Trump hasn’t been in NY so the toll clock was stopped most of the time.
I’m no expert, but if the Trump Revokable Trust was located in NYC, then it really shouldn’t matter where Trump was, yes? Doesn’t it act as a separate entity?
I have no idea if this is valid or not, but it deserves some scrutiny.
Is it more credible to believe that Biden read about it in the news, or that he has his hands all over this? After all, he’s such an honest guy. It’s got to be the former.
There’s controversy over whether Biden is truly stupid or just plays one on TV. I’m in the former camp. The man has never shown a single flash of competence — never mind genius — at any age, and there’s no reason for him to start now.
Stupid people can be very competent when it comes to destruction. That said, Biden never built much of anything, other than a corrupt empire. His incompetence is especially apparent in foreign affairs.
I support LegalInsurrection for its insight into the legal issues of the day. So here are some questions:
Is it not a clear violation of due process to indict someone for an unspecified law? How exactly would one be able to arrive at a criminal defense.
Does this not violate some ethical standard for prosecutors?
Can Legal Insurrection file a complaint with the New York Bar Association for this type of professional misconduct?
The law he’s been indicted for allegedly violating is not unspecified. The only thing unspecified is the “other crime” that he allegedly committed this one in order to cover up for, and he’s not indicted for that.
Bragg wins this case he electrifies dems minority base and is dems prez candidate for 24 and more than likely next Prez.
at what point does Bragg have to identify this so called other crime, at some point he has to disclose what it is supposed to be, A DA could play word salad and make a claim with no basis that a baseline crime actually occurred.
You violated Law A which says that to violate it you have to intend to violate Law B. If you fail to identify Law B- which is what th indictment apparently does according every legal analysis I’ve read- then the violation of Law A is, indeed, unspecified. yes, it’s named, and quoted, maybe even word for word from the statute book, but yet, is still unspecified.
Logic 101.
Whatever law they tied it to the bootstrap it into a felony is unspecified. There is no federal crime to bootstrap it to
How did I know you would show up trying to support this garbage?
Professor Milhouse, could you please explain how this indictment conformes to the Supreme Court decision in United States v. Carll, 105 U.S. 611 (1881)?
The “other crime” in the statute would, it would seem the Supreme Court deided, need to be clearly stated with specificity? But mayhap the Justices did not think this one through?
Felix, I think that your point is argued very well in a piece in the National Review by Andrew C. McCarthy. The piece is called “Bragg’s Indictment Even Fails as an Indictment.” Recommended reading.
I don’t see the relevance. That case does not refer to any “other crime”. It just says that the legislature’s intent was that it should apply only to those who knowingly spend counterfeit money, so the indictment should state that the defendant knew the money was counterfeit. Here the statute just says that if the crime was committed in furtherance of another crime it becomes a felony, and the indictment alleges that it was indeed so committed. I see nothing that would require (at this stage) that the other crime be described.
It is relevant because nobody, not even you, can know from the indictment what is at issue – Bragg merely repeats the words of the statute (“other crime”) but does not say which crime.
This gives no notice of the actual allegation, is useless with respect to, e.g., double jeopardy questions.
If this kind of indictment is sufficient you could make life easy for the prosecution and provide that “whoever commits an act or fails to commit an act and thereby violates a criminal law shall be punished in accordance with that criminal law” and let the indictment read “the accused committed an act or failed to commit an act and thereby violated a criminal law.”
Apparently you would think that is sufficient because the crime is specified and “only the other crime” is not?
Are you serious??
buck61, yes, at some point before trial he is going to have to reveal the “other crime”, so that Trump can defend himself. He just doesn’t have to do it now, and obviously he knows it won’t bear scrutiny so he’s delaying as much as he can.
Your confusing DeSantis with Trump
And that’s a sentence you should always not write. It’s just not right. All right?
Given we have already seen people convicted and jailed over nothing-burgers, seeing the state bringing yet another to trial is a cold comfort.
Stated in this very website, nothing makes my eyes glaze over faster than reading law rules. But reading the indictment and seeing all these comments it’s a big pile of crap helps me weigh it out. But as pointed out elsewhere the Democrats Propaganda Ministry has the rest of the year to drive guilty all over DJT.
Best Day Ever for ….Mike Nifong
BTW- check out the wikipedia page for Nifong.
what should be the headline
Nothing to Bragg About
How can you plead not guilty to something that isn’t a crime
What he’s charged with is a crime. The law exists, he just claims either not to have violated it, or that any violation has expired.
“You are accused of fradulently entering expenses to hide a crime.”
“What crime?”
“That is irrelevant, how do you plead?”
This is a 6th Amendment violation and the attorneys should have pointed out that any plea entered under such circumstances would require speculation on the part of the defendant.
It’s not a violation. All Trump has to say, and has said, is that he didn’t make those payments with the intent of covering up any crime.
You;re accused of a crime, but we’re not telling you what it is/
Pure F’ing ChiCom/Soviet.
Pure Star Chamber.
Pure Nazi courtroom.
Show me where my characterization is wrong.
We are telling you what it is. It is “falsifying business records in order to hide evidence of some other crime”. That’s all you’re accused of. We’re not accusing you of that other crime, so we don’t (yet) have to tell you what it is. Of course we can’t keep that up forever, but when we tell you you’re going to laugh at us, so we’re delaying it as long as we can.
Milhouse did you get your law degree degree from the Alvin Bragg school of law and shoe repair…,just curious
Unless I missed something, all 34 accounts are essentially identical, and each one states that Trump violated NY’s Penal Law § 175.10. That section provides,
I read § 175.10 as applying to an intent to commit, aid or conceal a “secnod” crime that is concurrent with or contemplated to be committed subsequent to the falsifying of business records. With all the alleged falsification occurring in 2017 and the implied “second” crime having occurred prior to 2017, this indictment should be dismissed forthwith.
Yet, it won’t
“Unless I missed something, all 34 accounts are essentially identical”
Tucker made the same point last night, so you are in good company.
It’s like Biden’s 50 years in “government service.” It was one year, 50 times.
“conceal the commission thereof” includes crimes that have already occurred, possibly long ago.
There is nothing in the statute that requires that the second crime be specifically proven. Bragg must convince the jury that the some other crime was being covered up, but that crime does not have to be specific. It could have many possibilities including federal campaign violations, tax cheating, adultery, paying a prostitute, racketeering, etc…
“includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof”
When I read “thereof,” I see it relating back to another crime that is going to be committed. Just like “aid” refers to aiding a crime that is going to be committed.
When the original crime was (allegedly) committed is irrelevant. So long as the falsifications in 2017 were committed in order to cover that crime up, they count as felonies, so their statute is five years, and the Wuhan Flu extension takes that to six years, so they just squeeze in.
Of course the idea that Alvin Bragg cares about violations of the law is ridiculous, but that’s a political objection, not a legal one.
Not an attorney and would love to hear an educated opinion on this. In reading the indictment the crux, I believe, is that Trump violated the law by paying Cohen back for monies given to Daniels and those monies amount to a campaign violation. Okay, however if what I’m reading is correct, Trump paid Cohen after the campaign was over and he was already sworn in as POTUS so can it really be part of the campaign? Additionally, DA Bragg has said the statute of limitations can / should / must be extended because Trump was outside of the jurisdiction of NY as POTUS. Yet, he was still a resident and was only in Washington DC because he was elected. I could be splitting hairs here and up front, I’m not a Trump fan boy, I just don’t think this indictment passes the smell test. Am I completely off the reservation here?
The other thing is that the arrangements were drawn up and the payments made while Trump was not even in charge of the company that did it. He divested himself of all control of his company while he was in the White House. So how can this be his crime in the first place?
I think the claim is that Cohen made a campaign contribution, and when Trump reimbursed him in 2017 he falsified the records to hide what the money was for. The falsification is a separate (alleged) crime from the (alleged) campaign contribution, and that’s all he’s charged with.
The whole thing stinks, but facially it appears to be within the law — just.
I get it now, thanks. I think there was a reason Voltaire had such a caustic opinion of lawyers.
Whadaya think would happen if demonstrators showed up outside this judges house?
Probably nothing.
With democrat judges Milhouse? Don’t be disingenuous here.
FBI SWAT would take over security at the judge’s house and would have “free fire” authorization. After all, the judge is doing the work of the Left and cannot be distracted. Plus, as I understand it, his daughter works for the Biden organization and that gives a family immunity from reality. /limited sarc.
Just in passing, does anyone else note a growing congruence between the Canadian tendency of rule by decree and US government?
Subotai Bahadur
If all the charges in the indictment are misdemeanors which the statute of limitations has run out on then I’m a little puzzled. The felony, I guess, was some unspecified crime. Doesn’t the DA have to tell you what your being charge with?
No, the charges are all felonies. The reason they’re felonies is because he claims they were committed to cover up some other crime, that (he alleges) was committed some time, by someone. It’s irrelevant what that other crime was, or who committed it, or when, or where. Bragg isn’t charging Trump with that crime, so at this point he doesn’t yet have to tell him what it is, or who he thinks committed it, or when. He will eventually have to do that, long enough before the trial that Trump can prepare a defense.
It is a crucial element of the crime, however.
No. The other crime is NOT an element of this crime. The intent to cover up that crime is the element of this crime, and that is specified in the indictment. For now, that is enough; long before the trial comes around he’s going to have to cough up more details.
“Nothingburger” is far too genial a term.
ABSOLUTE BULLCRAP is more accurate.
After reading it at https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf, which looks like a third grader wrote it, I have this observation:
Bragg is giving real life to the stereotype of black people being stupid, lazy and shiftless.
The statute doesn’t say that the other crime has to be specified, does it? All Bragg must do is convince the jury that the business records were falsified to cover up some other unspecified crime, which could be lots of possible things including federal campaign violations, tax violations, racketeering, etc…. He doesn’t have to prove that unspecified crime at all, just convince the jury beyond reasonable doubt that Trump must have been covering up some other crime when he falsified the records. This isn’t a bad indictment. It took a man of Bragg’s intellect to realize that NY Law does not require that he specify the actual crime that elevated the falsification to a felony, but only convince the jury that he was covering some crime up.
That said, it wouldn’t surprise me if the judge dismissed the indictment on statute of limitations grounds and an appeals court reinstates it.
He doesn’t have to prove the other crime, but at some point he has to let Trump know what it was, and how he claims it happened, so that Trump can prepare a defense. Otherwise Trump can say “What other crime? There never was any other crime, so I had nothing to cover up.”
That is true only insofar as the other crime needs not to actually have been committed, it could be attemped or only planned. It still needs to be a crime.
Your last sentence presumes a standard of legal ethics and integrity on the part of the judge that ignores the fact that he and his family are in Leftist run New York State and are active in the Leftist regime. The fact that matters have reached this point argues against faith in the system.
Subotai Bahadur
Call it weak, underwhelming even fallacious. It doesn’t matter. It will go to trial and he will be convicted. Has not anybody been paying attention?
This is compelling evidence for prosecutorial misconduct.
Start the proceedings now for removing Alvin Bragg. Also start the process for disbarring Bragg.
https://legalfactpro.com/how-does-a-lawyer-get-disbarred/
Everybody knows this is a plan to foul Trump’s campaign, given the timing, but as usual it will only galvanize his base and earn more pro-Trump converts from those uninfected with this one of several forms of mass hysteria that have been blooming over the last 7 years.
All this because Trump embarrassed all the mainstream pundits and a revered former President (Obama).
The vendetta against him has revealed the extent to which faceless security state bureaucrats conspire to figuratively wipe their backsides with the Constitution and has led the intelligentsia to debate among themselves why free speech and the First Amendment are “dangers to democracy” requiring a Politburo of apparatchiks to sift through all public communications censoring wrongthink.
We’ll either come out of this stronger or go down as a democratic republic in name only, with a hollowed-out Constitution that’s a historical curiosity, an example of a naive plan to actually live by the idea that our natural inclination is toward liberty and individual autonomy.
Welcome to post-constitutional America where the leftist fear “tossed out on a technicality” translates to “there is no crime and no evidence” in plain English.
I reckon the Democrats are terrified that Trump will be acquitted on all counts: if/when he’s reelected he’ll initiate a purge of DC so broad, ruthless, and deep that it’ll make Stalin look like “Mr. Sensitivity.”
May it come to pass.
So since Bragg hasn’t stated what the original crime is that’s being hidden does this give him subpoena power to grab all financial records related to Trump, his businesses, close associates and attorneys to go on a fishing trip for the original crime that the indictments are boot strapped on?
I blame the grand jury for issuing the indictment. I believe they would even indict a ham sandwich if asked.
The goal is to get past all of Trump’s Motions to Dismiss, not put on a sound case. Given what I’ve heard about the trial judge, I doubt any MTD, no matter how soundly argued by Trump’s team, will be granted. The actual case is all but irrelevant, once a trial can start Trump’s conviction is all but assured in a jurisdiction like NYC.