In an obvious political move, Manhattan NY District Attorney, Alvin Bragg has succeeded in getting a grand jury to indict former president Trump on what are supposedly 34 counts of something. The indictment seems related to the Stormy Daniels case where a porn actress, represented by felon lawyer Avenatti, succeeded in extorting $130,000 from Trump during the election season. Her only evidence was a photo taken at a public golf tournament. Trump, of course, denied the accusation. He is a well known germaphobe who does not even shake hands with people. That he would have sex with such a likely STD source is ridiculous but in the midst of a campaign he paid her off with a Non-disclosure agreement which, she of course violated.
Great hilarity is, of course, widely seen in the leftist media, like the LA Times. At least they do admit the concerns of many.
The larger share — the “maybe Trumpers,” as Ayres calls them, make up 55%-60% of the party. “They’re exactly the kind of people who will want to know if this is a credible case or a trumped up vendetta by a liberal New York, Democratic prosecutor who is out to get Trump,” Ayres said.
No kidding. Nancy Pelosi has weighed in with what she thinks the law is. She thinks he has to “prove his innocence.”
Alan Dershowitz disagrees.
Dershowitz said on the Sean Hannity program on Fox News that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is playing with fire.
[W]hen you’re a democratic elected prosecutor who ran on the campaign pledge of getting Trump and you’re going to indict, forget about the former president, the man who may become the future president if he beats the incumbent who is the head of your political party. Prosecutor, you’d better have the strongest case imaginable, not a case that depends on stitching together two inapplicable statutes and using Michael Cohen.
While politics has always been a scrappy arena, former President Donald Trump has radicalized Democrats and brought them to a level of derangement that few could have imagined. The full-court press to ruin Trump began the moment he descended the golden escalator to announce his candidacy in June 2015 and continues to this day.
It started with the Russiagate hoax, which was manufactured by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and carried out by the top ranks of the FBI and DOJ. The FBI falsified information on a FISA court warrant application in order to spy on Trump’s campaign, pushed the debunked Steele dossier as fact knowing full well that its sourcing was bogus, and openly boasted about trying to stop Trump from becoming president.
Now what ?
President Bill Clinton in 1998 was impeached by the House of Representatives for perjury and obstruction of justice related to his attempted coverup of his relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. The Senate voted against conviction, but the threat of criminal charges persisted until the final hours of Mr. Clinton’s presidency, when he struck a deal with independent counsel Robert Ray. The prosecutor agreed not to pursue a grand jury indictment after Mr. Clinton admitted to giving false testimony under oath, surrendered his law license for five years and accepted a $25,000 fine.
Clinton committed perjury as well as sexual misconduct in the Oval Office, of all places.
When compared with practices in other countries, Mr. Trump’s prosecution is less unusual, even among liberal democracies. In the last decade alone, sitting or former heads of state in France, Italy, Israel, Brazil and South Korea have been charged with crimes including illegal campaign financing, bribery and tax fraud.
The Israel prosecution is the closest comparison to Trump’s. It has been pushed by Netanyahu’s enemies on the left.
The corruption charges facing him, meanwhile, are problematic. It does look as if he and his wife have been living extravagantly, and they look grasping and a bit unethical in accepting expensive gifts, such as copious amounts of rare cigars and fine champagne, from people they call “friends” but who could be seen as supplicants.
I claim no expertise in Israeli law concerning gift limits, but judging from most coverage I’ve read, the gifts in themselves seem at worst a minor violation. The major allegation against Netanyahu would have to be that the gifts were accepted as a bribe for specific official action. If the gifts weren’t just an extravagance, but actually changed Israeli government policy, that would amount to a crime under the laws of most republics.
What is chilling about the charges against Netanyahu, though, is that the alleged “bribery” involved no change in policy at all. Instead, he is alleged to have influenced media outlets friendly to him to also be friendly to those who provided the gifts.
The similarity to Trump’s case is that the legal issues are murky but the opposition is determined to drive him from office. That link is to 2019 so the campaign did not work but Natanyahu is trying to reform the corrupt Israeli courts and the left has taken to the streets in protest.
In both cases the left is using the legal system to try to destroy a political rival. The recent incident at Stanford Law School shows that the left is in firm control of law schools. In time, not so long, the legal system will be controlled by the left.