The charges against President Trump further prove that a prosecutor can use a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich – and this is one that has quickly turned into a nothing burger.
Virtually every expert, on both sides of the political divide, agrees that the indictment revealed by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is very, very weak. It is so bad in so many ways that many pundits, television attorneys, and former prosecutors see a real possibility of the entire case being dismissed.
No, there, there
The issue of election law violation was examined by the Federal Election Commission – and they found no cause for action. The case had been reviewed by the previous Manhattan DA, and he did not find sufficient evidence to pursue even a civil case. The facts were reviewed by the Department of Justice – and they took a pass. So, why would Bragg take up the case?
Political motivation
From the very onset, the case was tainted by Bragg’s campaign pledge to use the office to “get Trump.” He made those judgmental comments even before he knew there was a case – or what evidence might be found. It was purely a political promise — and one he kept.
Most observers believe Bragg will never get a conviction in this case – it is that weak and so wrongfully brought. Some believe that Bragg’s motivation was not getting a conviction — the chief consideration of most prosecutors – but to win an easy indictment that would hurt Trump’s political image and keep him distracted from campaigning for the next year or so. Bragg seems to be timing the case to have the maximum impact on the 2024 presidential election. That may be why the next court date has been put off until December – eight months away and one month before the first Republican primary. That smacks of politics over issues of justice – prosecutorial abuse.
Creative prosecution
The political motivation can also be seen in how Bragg developed his case. He is using a unique legal argument – a method of the prosecution that has never been used or tested in the history of the United States.
Bragg’s initial problem was the fact that the Statute of Limitations had arguably run out on the core election fraud issues and the hush payments. He gets around that by tying those actions to a criminal felony. But what is that felony? He does not say. It is not in the indictment – and he refused to give an answer to reporters.
Some say it is an election law violation, but even that would have to be adjudicated. Bragg would be prosecuting a federal crime. That is a head-scratcher for most legal authorities. Bragg is not in a position that allows the prosecution of federal cases. Some believe he will use state election laws. But again, there is no violation of New York election laws since the only possible charge is federal.
Showboating
Bragg has filed 34 charges against Trump – but not really. What he has done is to string out the central charges by creating individual charges for each check written out to Michael Cohen. That is for appearances, not law. He could have made all the checks one charge since they all represent the same thing. The way Bragg structured the indictment, Trump could be declared guilty based on one check and not guilty on another check made out for the same exact purpose.
Summary
What we have in this case is a highly politically motivated prosecutor going to extreme measures to “get” a presidential candidate. No matter what you think of Trump, this is outrageous prosecutorial abuse and the weaponizing of law enforcement for political purposes. It is the reason that you see so many Trump detractors – like George Romney – supporting the claim of a politically motivated prosecution. It sets a very bad and dangerous precedent for American justice in the future.
Hopefully, the case will be dismissed post haste, and we can get to the other cases to see if they have more merit than this bit of prosecutorial poo-poo.
So, there ‘tis.