Here's lawyer John Hinderaker at Powerline: "Trump indictment: as bad as we thought"
The indictment alleges that all of this was done “with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,” but it never says what that other crime was. The second crime is mandatory because without it, falsifying a business record under New York law is a misdemeanor on which the statute of limitation has run. Presumably the second crime is alleged to be a campaign finance violation. But the payment to Daniels did not violate the campaign finance laws.
Emphasis mine. Here's my other go-to legal source, Legal Insurrection: "‘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.”
Nobody can put lipstick on this pig: "Legal Experts Across the Political Spectrum Are Laughing at Alvin Bragg's Indictment of Donald Trump."
It looks like Alvin Bragg is going to make the history books, just not in the way he expected:
Alvin Bragg’s unsealed indictment is an indictment of Alvin Bragg. Legitimate law schools will forever use this indictment to teach the concept of prosecutorial abuse of discretion. All Americans, regardless of political persuasions, should condemn this indictment as the travesty… https://t.co/UQshdUftsr
— John Ratcliffe (@JohnRatcliffe) April 4, 2023
And finally, here's Dan McLaughlin with just his first legal analysis of this stink bomb: "The Ridiculousness of the Trump Indictment, Part One: The Statute of Limitations Problem"
The last payment, and last false record, charged in the indictment, came in December 2017, more than five years ago. A charge under the misdemeanor statute would obviously be time-barred, which is a major reason why Bragg has pursued a felony charge. But that is also outside the five-year window, so some creative lawyering would be required to even get this case a hearing.
Shhh! The actual charges are a secret. That's the American way:
Prosecutors don’t have to reveal all of their evidence ahead of trial, but basic notions of fair play require you to inform a criminal defendant of the basis for the charges against him, such that he can present a defense. Bragg refuses to do that.
An absolute banana-republic farce.
5 comments:
ON THE NEXT “ARRESTED DEVELOPER”…
LUCILLE BLUTH: “America has officially become a banana republic!”
NARRATOR: “America is not a banana republic.”
Questions:
How many criminal indictments do you think Trump will have by the time the Bragg/Stormy case has its next in-person hearing in December?
Powerline, Red State, John Ratcliffe and National Review all agree with each other? Wow! What about Curly and Moe?
Is there a cure for Trump Arraignment Syndrome?
“How many criminal indictments do you think Trump will have by the time the Bragg/Stormy case has its next in-person hearing in December?”
Answer: However many the Democrats think they need for their political benefit.
Or as the President of El Salvador remarked:
“Think what you want about former President Trump and the reasons he’s being indicted. But just imagine if this happened in any other country, where a government arrested the main opposition candidate.
The United States ability to use “democracy” as foreign policy is gone.”
Always wearing the martyr's thorns is a very effective way to avoid acknowledging one's weaknesses and missteps, whether as an individual or as a party.
The catch with self- martyrdom is this: to be a martyr, you have to lose.
And boy oh boy, have Republicans been fulfilling that requirement.
Ali Alexander, saying the quiet part out loud: “We just lost the Wisconsin Supreme Court. I do not see a path to 270 on 2024.”
So in other words, Wisconsin voters… stopped the steal.
Post a Comment