Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.

[George K]

Election fraud is a Federal issue. That's the only potential felony. Everything else Trump et al are accused of is a misdemeanor - whose statute of limitations has expired.

Bragg has no standing here.

[Jolly]

Ok...What if...

1. Bragg's case goes down in flames.
2. Fanni folds.
3. SCOTUS jerks the Jan 6 rug out from under the SP.

Then, even a blind voter can see this was lawfare. A lot of people may
not like Trump, but Americans are inherently fair. What happens?

[Mik]

It could make me do something I really do not want to do.

[taiwan_girl]

@Jolly said in Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.:

Ok...What if...

1. Bragg's case goes down in flames.
2. Fanni folds.
3. SCOTUS jerks the Jan 6 rug out from under the SP.

Then, even a blind voter can see this was lawfare. A lot of people may
not like Trump, but Americans are inherently fair. What happens?

I will change some people view but not very many I dont think. I think that high majority of people at this time have a view of President Trump (positive or negative) that the above points will not change.

Take yourself for example and the opposite occurs to the points you posted. President Trump is found guilty of every charge. The Supreme Court says that the Jan 6 charges were valid, and also indicates that President Trump bears responsibility. Will that change your mind about President Trump? Probably not. (Actually, no "probably" about it. LOL)

[Jolly]

Lawfare .

Do you consider that a proper tactic by the party in power, to win an election?

Yes, or no?

[Axtremus]

@Jolly said in Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.:

Lawfare .

No such thing.

One cannot be excused by the law just by running in an election.

[Jolly]

@Axtremus said in Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.:

@Jolly said in Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.:

Lawfare .

No such thing.

One cannot be excused by the law just by running in an election.

Yes, there is such a thing.

Embrace reality, it will set you free.

[taiwan_girl]

@Jolly said in Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.:

Lawfare .

Do you consider that a proper tactic by the party in power, to win an election?

Yes, or no?

What is the definition of lawfare?

[Jolly]

@taiwan_girl said in Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.:

@Jolly said in Trump prosecution may be fatally flawed.:

Lawfare .

Do you consider that a proper tactic by the party in power, to win an election?

Yes, or no?

What is the definition of lawfare?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawfare

Or if you prefer a dictionary definition... https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/lawfare

[taiwan_girl]

You are biasing yourself to say that President Trump is not guilty and did not commit any crimes. I don't think that you or I know this with certainty.

It is not uncommon to charge a famous person with a crime as an example. Being President does not exempt you from not committing a crime.

If a police officer is caught speeding, should he be able to avoid the ticket by telling the arresting office that he is also a police officer? If you do the crime, you do the consequences.

[Mik]

Your fallacy, TG, is the motivation for filing the charges. No other president, heck no other person I am aware of, has ever been slapped with such an array of dubious charges, nor have elected officials made prosecuting someone a platform for their election. This is political, plain and simple.

[George K]

More from McCarthy:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/04/braggs-prosecution-of-trump-violates-new-york-states-constitution/

---

Ihave argued that former president Donald Trump’s prosecution in the so-called hush-money case brought by Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney Alvin Bragg is offensive in various ways.

Bragg, an election denier, is trying to convict Trump of a crime that is not charged in the indictment — to wit, conspiracy to steal the 2016 election by suppressing negative information in violation of federal campaign law. This violates the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which requires a felony charge to be spelled out in an indictment whose criminal elements have been established by probable cause to the satisfaction of a grand jury. Here, the problem is not just that there is no indication the grand jury was presented with an election-theft conspiracy offense; there is no such conspiracy crime in New York penal law. As a state prosecutor, moreover, Bragg has no jurisdiction to enforce federal law — as to which Congress vested “exclusive” criminal- and civil-enforcement authority, respectively, in the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission.

Worse still is that Judge Juan Merchan is not just letting Bragg get away with this; he is consciously abetting the district attorney — thus adding heft to Trump’s claim that Merchan is deeply conflicted by political bias.

Nevertheless, the violation of Trump’s rights is even more basic.

Once one clears away the election-theft and federal-law underbrush, Trump is actually charged not with a conspiracy but with 34 substantive felony violations of a New York statute that makes it a crime to falsify business records with the fraudulent intent to conceal “another crime.”

What other crime? The penal statute in question doesn’t say. That’s a fatal problem because New York State’s constitution mandates that a statute must spell out any statutory terms it is incorporating. Under Article III, §16, of the state constitution, incorporation by reference is not permitted.