The indictment of Donald Trump does not cite a law he has broken. Soros DA Bragg said he doesn’t have to tell us what law was broken. Bragg might create a new precedent of charging people who didn’t actually break a law.
If it were illegal to influence an election, countless Democrats would be in prison. The campaign finance violation would only come into play if he used campaign funds instead of his personal funds.
Some of us wonder how a Manhattan DA can prosecute a federal law.
The indictment is legally insufficient on its face. New York state law does not make it a crime to influence an election. Federal law does not make it a crime either. Maybe that’s why no law is actually cited in the indictment. Nor are the facts sufficient. #TrumpArraignment https://t.co/CbOj27v41v
— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) April 4, 2023
JD Rucker writes:
Prima facie, this indictment is a joke. It demonstrates the degradation of the United States of America under the Biden-Harris regime and Uniparty Swamp rule. Most importantly, both Alvin Bragg and this indictment are national embarrassments, as I noted on Twitter.
Bragg admitted “the indictment does not specify” which particular crimes these might be, leaving the door open for Trump’s team to challenge the legitimacy of the charges.
“What struck me was the statement of facts which laid out what I would consider to be facts related to a conspiracy,” said Jim Roberts, a white-collar defense lawyer at Schlam Stone & Dolan and a former Manhattan assistant district attorney. “That charge [conspiracy] is notably absent from the formal charges that are contained in the indictment,” he added, unlike the one brought against former Trump adviser Steve Bannon by the same office last year.
“The multiple theories of the predicate crime required to elevate the misdemeanor charge … to a felony might be akin to an everything but the kitchen sink approach,” Roberts added.
George Washington U Law School Professor Jonathan Turley called it a “patently political prosecution.” Professor Turley thinks the “case could collapse.”
Bragg has to tell Donald Trump what crime he committed eventually. We can’t wait to see what he comes up with in that BS cauldron of his.
George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley slams Bragg’s patently political prosecution.
“This case could collapse.”
“There’s no there there.”
“A legal slurpy…no nutritional value, there’s really nothing there.” pic.twitter.com/qElD8BGv6q
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 4, 2023
As Bret Baier reports, Bragg said he doesn’t have to tell us the laws Donald Trump broke. Imagine that in New York, we can now commit crimes that don’t exist, or if they do, they don’t have to tell us what they are. That’s a little too police-state-ish – don’t you think?
We can’t find a criminal statute, but we’ll keep looking.
REPORTER: “The indictment does not specifically say what those crimes were… What laws were broken?”
DA BRAGG: “The indictment doesn’t specify because the law does not so require…”
BRAGG makes NO SENSE!
Kangaroo court! 🤡🤡🤡 pic.twitter.com/pOng4ewZ9S— Emily (@Emme0703) April 4, 2023
Presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy says Bragg is “prosecuting a federal crime under the guise of state law.”
Alvin Bragg is effectively prosecuting a federal crime under the guise of state law. That has profound consequences. I explain them here in a way that no one has. pic.twitter.com/D2IwCXlxNT
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) April 4, 2023
If the bar is you don’t need to break a state law to be charged, Bragg should be able to arrest real criminals better than he does. More than half of the felons have their felonies bumped down to misdemeanors in Bragg’s office.
Bragg: “We can not, and will not normalize serious criminal conduct.”
Last year, Alvin Bragg reduced 52% of all felony charges to misdemeanors. pic.twitter.com/lS4cYDpPst
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) April 4, 2023
Even CNN finds it UNDERWHELMING. It’s the same case as it existed for seven years, [and no one would charge based on that except Alvin.]
Even CNN’s legal analyst is saying this case is underwhelming. When even CNN won’t shill for you against Trump, it’s bad, really bad. pic.twitter.com/KCczjOW4Il
— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) April 4, 2023
Subscribe to the Daily Newsletter
wpDiscuz
