Renown George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley wrote a scathing article that blasted Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s attempt to indict Donald Trump. The article referred to the Democratic attorney’s case as “the ultimate Frankenstein” in a feeble legal attempt to take down the 45th president of the United States and the likely major presidential challenger to Joe Biden in 2024.
The article relayed that Mr. Bragg was trying to comb both state and federal codes for his case against Mr. Trump. The federal charge is that Trump failed to report the hush money on Stormy Daniels and this act constitutes an effective campaign donation. Professor Turley cited that the Justice Department, Mr. Bragg’s predecessor Cyrus Vance, and even Mr. Bragg himself previously declined to prosecute Trump on this case.
Professor Turley noted that there are several serious legal problems that face Mr. Bragg’s case. The first is that the statute of limitations on what Trump is accused of has expired and the second is that Bragg would have to prove that the aforementioned hush money was paid solely for election purposes. He further noted how similar cases like Bragg’s had failed. Turley slams the attempt to indict Mr. Trump as “patently political prosecution.” Turley also pointed out the weaknesses of other investigations into the former Republican president.
The professor drew attention to the broader societal problem of political prosecution in his article. He wrote that “[p]olls 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 a separate tweet he wrote about his concern that the star witness, former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, is being using by Bragg in his attempt to indict and convict Trump. He wrote “Given Cohen’s past lies and conduct, his cross examination will be a target rich environment. Yet, Cohen just added another potential item for a withering cross: he denied any memory of a waiver of confidentiality in a public tiff with Robert Costello [Cohen’s former attorney]. If that is Cohen’s signature, his denial cannot only be used to show his spotty memory of important legal details or, equally damaging, his own lack of veracity.”
Given Cohen’s past lies and conduct, his cross examination will be a target rich environment. Yet, Cohen just added another potential item for a withering cross: he denied any memory of a waiver of confidentiality in a public tiff with Robert Costello….https://t.co/RAJrZ1GuD5
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 21, 2023
While Turley has come out with a principled position on this matter and has been critical of Mr. Bragg, others have taken a different route. Lawrence O’Donnell, MSNBC host of The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, painted a ridiculously hilarious hagiographic account of the Democratic Manhattan District Attorney and even went as far as seriously referring to the man as ‘the Anointed One’. In his monologue Mr. O’Donnell didn’t care to go into the details of case against Trump.
Similarly, Erica Orden wrote in a piece in Politico that referred to Mr. Bragg as “by-the-book” and called him in a tweet “a politics-averse prosecutor”.
My profile of Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg, a politics-averse prosecutor who is preparing to take on the brash, mudslinging former president: https://t.co/nOAzOOhY0V
— erica orden (@eorden) March 21, 2023
This “by-the-book” attorney who is “politics-averse” has a tendency to downgrade felony cases to misdemeanors, tends to only win conviction 51 percent of the time, and now in the special case of Trump tries to upgrade an outdated potential misdemeanor into a felony case.
Seasoned civil rights lawyer Robert Barnes ridiculed Alvin Bragg’s case as containing no crime in it. Mr. Barnes’s remarked that “…if you are gonna prosecute Trump, you are saying that Trump paid too much to himself [in terms of this being an election-related crime]!?! There is no limit [for a candidate to self-fund their own campaign], Trump can give as much as he wants to himself. He has a First Amendment right [to do so]- the U.S. Supreme Court has already established that. You can’t put a limit on how much you spend on your own candidacy.”