This week, the case of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg against former President Donald Trump heated up again.
Tuesday, Bragg filed an opposition to an effort by Trump’s counsel to transfer his hush-money case to federal court. Late last month, Trump’s attorneys argued that the case cannot be tried in a state court because the alleged violations occurred while he was president, making it a federal matter.
In court documents filed on Tuesday, Manhattan prosecutors argued that the case should remain in state court because the former president’s “alleged criminal conduct had no connection to his official duties and responsibilities as President, but instead arose from his unofficial actions relating to his private businesses and pre-election conduct.”
A grand jury in Manhattan indicted Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business documents related to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.
Trump allegedly sent Daniels a payment prior to the 2016 election in order to silence Daniels about their affair in 2006. Trump pled not guilty to the 34 counts against him.
Several legal experts have argued since the indictment that Bragg’s case is exceedingly weak.
“The question to ask yourself in a case like this [is], ‘Would a case like this be brought against anybody else, whether he or she be president, former president or a regular citizen?’ The answer is… no,” Former Whitewater deputy counsel Sol Wisenberg said.
“You can debate all day long whether or not… Trump should be indicted related to the records at Mar-a-Lago, whether or not he should be indicted with respect to Jan. 6 incitement of lawless activity… Those are real crimes if they occurred, and he committed them,” he said. “This is preposterous.”
Former federal and New York State prosecutor Tali Farhadian Weinstein said: “Bragg is making a strategic decision to push back against Donald Trump and it might backfire. The former president is demanding that the Manhattan District Attorney’s office provide a ‘bill of particulars,’ outlining the specific reason they upgraded his charges of business record fraud from misdemeanors to felonies in the Stormy Daniels hush payment case — something that under New York law, requires the fraud to have been committed in order to cover up a second crime. Bragg has declined to provide it so far. This could actually be a problem for Bragg.”
Alan Dershowitz, a renowned attorney, believes Bragg could be disbarred for his case against former President Donald Trump.
Senior Vox correspondent Ian Millhiser wrote, “The indictment of former President Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is excruciatingly anticlimactic. It relates to Trump’s alleged attempt to conceal a potential extramarital affair with a porn star, not his efforts to overthrow the legitimately elected government of the United States. And there is a substantial possibility that this indictment will result in an even greater anticlimax. It is uncertain whether the felony statute Trump is accused of violating applies to him.
Mark Stern, a writer for the liberal outlet Slate, published a story titled, “The Trump Indictment Is Not the Slam-Dunk Case Democrats Wanted.”
More on this story via Conservative Brief:
John Bolton — who served as a national security adviser in the Trump administration and has since come out against Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign — appeared on CNN and blasted the charges filed against his ex-boss, former President Trump, saying the indictment was “even weaker than I feared it would be.” CONTINUE READING…