Bragg Gets Horrible News About Case Against Trump

OPINION:  This article contains commentary which may reflect the author’s opinion

Due to his non-compliance with state Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests for information regarding his office’s potential exchanges with the Department of Justice, White House, and Democrat lawmakers regarding Bragg’s prosecution of Donald Trump, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg is now the target of two lawsuits.

After a lengthy investigation into Trump regarding hush-money interactions made during the 2016 presidential election, Bragg indicted Trump in March of this year on 34 felony counts of falsifying records.

According to Bragg, Trump fabricated New York business papers in order to “conceal damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election.”

Conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, with offices in Washington, D.C., has filed a lawsuit against Bragg on the grounds that it believes Bragg and his office worked together or corresponded with the Justice Department, the White House, and Rep. Daniel Goldman, D-N.Y., over the case. Heritage contends in its lawsuit that these acts ultimately prompted inquiries into Bragg’s behavior from numerous U.S. House committees.

“Regrettably, these questions have not been met with answers. These reports have raised concerns in many circles based in large part upon the longstanding history of President Trump’s political opponents coordinating their activities to systematically weaponize the criminal justice system against him and thereby pervert the course of Justice,” According to a filing with the first lawsuit.

Heritage claims in a second complaint that Bragg and his colleagues enlisted the aid of prestigious law firms that focus on white-collar crime for free. At this point, they are requesting that the court rule that the sought papers are “subject to release under the New York Freedom of Information Law,” order Bragg and his team to give the information, and prevent them from “seeking costs and fees for the request at issue in this case.”

Heritage claims that despite the group’s claims that they have a right to access the correspondence between the alleged parties under New York’s FOIL rules, Bragg and his associates have mainly rebuffed the group’s requests for them.

Mike Howell, the head of Heritage’s Oversight Project, stated that there is grounds to suspect Bragg was a “prolific communicator” by mobile phone and that they believe Bragg was “coordinating, or otherwise communicating,” with Trump’s political adversaries.

Howell stated in a discussion with Fox “The fact we have to file a lawsuit against Bragg who says he can’t produce these records and says he doesn’t have the systems to do so, is proof-positive of another dual standard of justice at play in this country.”

“You have a weaponized actor who’s going after the former president on a loony theory about his document retention, whereas the DA can’t even keep his own documents, and it’s in violation of the information laws he is bound by,” he added.

“He’s a hypocrite. He’s wasting an exorbitant amount of New York’s taxpayer’s dollars to defend this now and delay it and obstruct it when he could’ve just turned it over,” he opined.

Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard lawyer, presented a paper on the Gatestone Institute website last week that discussed the difficulties President Trump is having defending himself against the countless baseless accusations leveled against him by the far-left.

Here’s what Dershowitz had to say:

  • There are disturbing suggestions that among the reasons lawyers are declining the case is because they fear legal and career reprisals.
  • There is a nefarious group that calls itself The 65 Project that has as its goal to intimidate lawyers into not representing Trump or anyone associated with him. They have threatened to file bar charges against any such lawyers.
  • I wrote an op-ed offering to defend pro bono any lawyers that The 65 Project goes after. So The 65 Project immediately went after me, and contrived a charge based on a case in which I was a constitutional consultant, but designed to send a message to potential Trump lawyers: If you defend Trump or anyone associated with him, we will target you and find something to charge you with. The lawyers to whom I spoke are fully aware of this threat — and they are taking it seriously…. It may even be worse today….
  • Good lawyers… generally welcome challenges, especially in high-profile cases. This case is different: the threats to the lawyers are greater than at any time since McCarthyism. Nor is the comparison to McCarthyism a stretch. I recall during the 1950s how civil liberties lawyers, many of whom despised communism, were cancelled, and attacked if they dared to represent people accused of being communists.
  • Our system of justice is based on the John Adams standard: he too was attacked for defending the British soldiers accused of the Boston Massacre, but his representation of these accused killers now serves as a symbol of the 6th Amendment right to counsel. That symbol has now been endangered….
  • Trump’s lawyers have now alleged that one of the prosecutors has suggested to Stanley Woodward, the lawyer for Waltine Nauta, Trump’s co-defendant, that his application for judgeship may be negatively affected if he persists in defending Nauta vigorously rather than encouraging him to cooperate against Trump. If that is true – and I have not seen the evidence to support it – then it represents a direct attack on the 6th Amendment.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.






Send this to a friend