" This leaves us with the following state of affairs — legal experts can’t figure out what the Bragg case is about, the Supreme Court will probably give Trump a win on immunity and his poll numbers will continue to climb — as they did in the new CNN survey released Sunday." David Catron
A defense strategy for the case of NY v. Trump -Howard J. Warner "The sham trial in NYC being orchestrated by DA Alvin Bragg against Donald Trump is designed to keep Trump off the campaign trail and further salacious material to create more doubt about him in the minds of undecided voters. The judge, Juan Merchan, is an acting Supreme Court judge, appointed to this position by the Administrative Chief Judge Ann Pfau and selected for this case since he has presided over other Trump cases. Though I am not a lawyer, the obvious failings of this case are numerous. I propose to outline a strategy for a not-guilty verdict instead of a hung jury." . . .
Bragg’s Trump Trial Refutes Case Against Immunity - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics "Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg wasn’t formally involved in last Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing in Trump v. United States, yet his transparently politicized prosecution of the former president provided a poignant subtext for the oral arguments. The hearing concerned Special Counsel Jack Smith’s claim that ex-presidents enjoy no immunity from prosecution for crimes allegedly committed while in office. It could hardly have been lost on the justices that, as oral arguments proceeded, Trump was cooped up in a New York courtroom while Bragg’s prosecutors accused him of offenses that legal experts of all political stripes have pronounced legally unintelligible.
"Writing in the New York Times, for example, Boston University law professor Jed Handel Shugerman described the Bragg prosecution as an embarrassment and a historic mistake: “As a reality check: It is legal for a candidate to pay for a nondisclosure agreement.” Yet Bragg and his lead prosecutor Matthew Colangelo — late of the Biden Justice Department — have gone through all manner of legal contortions to transform Trump’s NDA with a porn star into an election interference case involving the 2016 presidential contest." . . .
The Democrats Validate an Einstein Postulation - John Green . . ."The Dems came up with a surefire battle plan to prevent Donald Trump from returning to the Oval Office. Just prosecute him for something — it didn’t matter what. The Donald would become “damaged goods,” and voter outrage would prevent a return of mean tweets to the office that comes with an armed entourage and a big blue airplane. It should have been foolproof. But as engineers say: “One should never underestimate the ability of fools to screw things up.' ” . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment