Demokraterne leder efter skod

‘Jeg har ventet på dette i syv år’, skrev forfatteren Stephen King på Twitter. Men nej, heller ikke denne gang fik han sit ønske om at se Trump i håndjern opfyldt. En overivrig statsanklager ved navn Alvin Bragg havde ellers lovet den eksalterede venstrefløj en gang for alle at gøre op med den væsentligste politiske modstander, Orange Hitler, ved hjælp at det juridiske system og således annullere folkets vilje..

Forfatnings-eksperten (og Hillary Clinton donoren) Jonathan Turley skriver 

While an indictment was expected this week, the grand jury looking into former President Donald Trump will go another week amid reports of opposition in the grand jury over what is viewed as a “weak” case.

The problem is that Bragg has long been searching for a crime in the criminal code to fulfill his pitch during his campaign that he was the man for voters who wanted to bag Trump.

The falsification of business records in reference to the $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels might have been a possibility, but it lacked two things.

First, it expired as a chargeable misdemeanor after two years — and that was roughly five years ago.

Second, it was a mere misdemeanor that could be brushed off by Trump even if they succeeded.

Prosecutors then created a Rube Goldberg approach and suggested that the misdemeanor was committed to conceal a federal election law violation — a crime that the Justice Department declined to charge.

That theory has been widely ridiculed, even by many on the left. The bootstrapping of a federal crime under this statute appears unprecedented and likely unsustainable.

The reason that the Justice Department likely declined the case was that it had previously tried to show that hush money paid to bury an affair was a federal campaign expense.

It failed in the case of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.

There are a host of reasons why a married celebrity like Trump might pay hush money separate from a presidential run.

Bragg himself scoffed at the theory and stopped the investigation when he came into power.

Two prosecutors, Carey R. Dunne and Mark F. Pomerantz, then resigned and Pomerantz took what some of us view as a highly unprofessional and improper act of publishing a book on the case against Trump — a person who was still under investigation and not charged, let alone convicted, of any crime.

The pressure campaign worked and Bragg pushed the dubious theory to a grand jury.

Like Kailasa, the Bragg indictment has an established con man who insisted it exists.

Bragg has Michael Cohen, the former lawyer to Trump. A disbarred lawyer, Cohen is a convicted felon and one of the most repellent figures with a long history of false statements.

Then things got even worse when the lawyer for his star witness came forward with more than 300 emails contradicting his testimony.

Another letter on behalf of Cohen to the Federal Election Commission also surfaced that expressly contradicted his claims.

Finally, and probably most significantly for Bragg, the politics may have turned.

Even Democrats are hard pressed to defend the reported basis for the indictment and Sen. Chuck Schumer declined to express his support for the effort.

Alan Dershowitz fortalte ifølge Conservative Brief Fox News, at hovedvidnet, den kontroversielle advokat Michael Cohen var et kriminelt dårligt vidnet, bogstaveligt talt

“I don’t think an indictment can actually come forward now after the comments made by [Robert] Costello,” the attorney said.

He said that “he has proved that the main witness is going to be a perjuring liar on the witness stand, and that puts the district attorney in a terrible position.”

“If he uses Cohen as a witness, he could actually lose his bar license. It’s unethical to put a witness on the stand who you know is lying, and he has to know that Cohen will be lying. Or he tries the case without Cohen, which would be very difficult, or he does the right thing: he drops the case,” he said.

Samt en eller anden, anden ekspert på ABC

Og også andre venstreorienterede eksperter underkender Braggs projekt rapporterede Trending Politics

Despite his personal dislike for Trump, Lichtman, like many lawyers, believe that the case is weak.

“This case is a joke, frankly, and I’ve litigated against that office for 33 years. I don’t think that case is winnable,” said Lichtman. Some of Lichtman’s high-profile clients have included Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, who was the former leader of the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico, and John A. Gotti, who is the son of the infamous Gambino crime family boss, John J. Gotti. Lichtman has also represented clients in cases related to organized crime, financial fraud, and drug trafficking.

“I loathe Trump for a variety of reasons, but it’s still America, and we still have to be concerned about cases brought against people that we don’t like, because the next day it’s going to be cases against people we do like,” Lichtman said. “Sometimes unpopular people get screwed unfairly by the system just because people don’t like them.”

Rolling Stone also spoke with Randy Zelin, a professor at Cornell Law School who has 32 years of experience practicing criminal defense. Zelin, who does not support Trump or his policies, expressed his belief that based on the available information, the felony charge is unlikely to hold: “I do not believe, based upon what we know, that the felony charge will stick.”

He continued, “What you need to do to elevate the misdemeanor falsification of business records to a felony simply is this — [show] that the act of falsifying the business records was done in furtherance of another felony, another crime, that’s it.”

“I think that the district attorney’s office in New York County is running a great risk of diluting the strength of other potential cases brought by other prosecutors, because this is a weak case — legally, it is a weak case.”

Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan mente, som mange at Stormy Daniels affæren var den forkerte sag at ramme Trump med og understregede dermed det udbredte og dybfølte sentiment om blot at ramme Trump hinsides rimeligheden, der netop havde ægget Alvin Bragg. Men om det er de ligeledes absurde beskyldninger om at Trump skulle have forsøgt at presse Georgias statssekretær til at begå valgsvindel eller historien om de dokumenter, som Trump havde taget med sig hjem til Mar-A-Lago (Siden “opdagede” Joe Biden dokumenter i sin garage, der var fri adgang til for hele hans korrupte familie) eller hans skatteforhold, ligeledes i New York, som man har gransket nidkært i mange år.

De roder rundt i et askebæger efter et bedre skod.