'Historic mistake': Law professor takes apart Alvin Bragg's case against Trump
Apr 24, 2024 20:13:10 #
'Historic mistake': Law professor takes apart Alvin Bragg's case against Trump — then predicts the outcome
Jed Handelsman Shugerman, a law professor at Boston University, thinks Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's prosecution of Donald Trump is a "historic mistake."
Shugerman made that conclusion after witnessing opening arguments on Monday in which prosecutors alleged Trump "orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 p**********l e******n."
In short, prosecutors claim Trump falsified business records to interfere in the 2016 e******n.
The problems with their thesis, Shugerman wrote in the New York Times, are obvious: an "unprecedented use of state law" and a "persistent avoidance of specifying an e******n crime or a valid theory of fraud."
"As a reality check, it is legal for a candidate to pay for a nondisclosure agreement. Hush money is unseemly, but it is legal," Shugerman wrote.
He continued:
In Monday’s opening argument, the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo still evaded specifics about what was illegal about influencing an e******n, but then he claimed, “It was e******n f***d, pure and simple.” None of the relevant state or federal statutes refer to filing violations as fraud. Calling it “e******n f***d” is a legal and strategic mistake, exaggerating the case and setting up the jury with high expectations that the prosecutors cannot meet.
According to Shugerman, there are "three red f**gs raising concerns about selective prosecution" in the case, all three of which concern the novel legal theory prosecutors are using against Trump for which there is no precedent.
"Eight years after the alleged crime itself, it is reasonable to ask if this is more about Manhattan politics than New York law," Shugerman wrote. "This case should serve as a cautionary tale about broader prosecutorial abuses in America."
He added, [/]”This case is still an embarrassment of prosecutorial ethics and apparent selective prosecution."[/i]
Still, Shugerman said the legal process should play itself out — but predicted Trump may ultimately win.
"If Monday’s opening is a preview of exaggerated allegations, imprecise legal theories, and persistently unaddressed problems, the prosecutors might not win a conviction at all," he said.
George Washington Law School professor Jonathan Turley holds similar views about the case.
On Monday, Turley said he is left in "utter disbelief" that Bragg chose to prosecute the case, which he described as "an embarrassment."
https://www.theblaze.com/news/shugerman-trump-trial-historic-mistake
The DOJ and FEC both investigated this and did not find anything wrong.
Jed Handelsman Shugerman, a law professor at Boston University, thinks Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's prosecution of Donald Trump is a "historic mistake."
Shugerman made that conclusion after witnessing opening arguments on Monday in which prosecutors alleged Trump "orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 p**********l e******n."
In short, prosecutors claim Trump falsified business records to interfere in the 2016 e******n.
The problems with their thesis, Shugerman wrote in the New York Times, are obvious: an "unprecedented use of state law" and a "persistent avoidance of specifying an e******n crime or a valid theory of fraud."
"As a reality check, it is legal for a candidate to pay for a nondisclosure agreement. Hush money is unseemly, but it is legal," Shugerman wrote.
He continued:
In Monday’s opening argument, the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo still evaded specifics about what was illegal about influencing an e******n, but then he claimed, “It was e******n f***d, pure and simple.” None of the relevant state or federal statutes refer to filing violations as fraud. Calling it “e******n f***d” is a legal and strategic mistake, exaggerating the case and setting up the jury with high expectations that the prosecutors cannot meet.
According to Shugerman, there are "three red f**gs raising concerns about selective prosecution" in the case, all three of which concern the novel legal theory prosecutors are using against Trump for which there is no precedent.
"Eight years after the alleged crime itself, it is reasonable to ask if this is more about Manhattan politics than New York law," Shugerman wrote. "This case should serve as a cautionary tale about broader prosecutorial abuses in America."
He added, [/]”This case is still an embarrassment of prosecutorial ethics and apparent selective prosecution."[/i]
Still, Shugerman said the legal process should play itself out — but predicted Trump may ultimately win.
"If Monday’s opening is a preview of exaggerated allegations, imprecise legal theories, and persistently unaddressed problems, the prosecutors might not win a conviction at all," he said.
George Washington Law School professor Jonathan Turley holds similar views about the case.
On Monday, Turley said he is left in "utter disbelief" that Bragg chose to prosecute the case, which he described as "an embarrassment."
https://www.theblaze.com/news/shugerman-trump-trial-historic-mistake
The DOJ and FEC both investigated this and did not find anything wrong.
Apr 24, 2024 20:15:09 #
Lily wrote:
b 'Historic mistake': Law professor takes apart A... (show quote)
Obviously, Soros Bragg believes he is smarter than the DOJ and FEC.
Apr 24, 2024 20:18:10 #
Lily wrote:
b 'Historic mistake': Law professor takes apart A... (show quote)
Facts do not matter. The verdict is in.
Apr 24, 2024 20:39:41 #
Apr 24, 2024 21:30:58 #
Lily wrote:
b 'Historic mistake': Law professor takes apart A... (show quote)
It was never about "crime and punishment" it is only about STOPPING TRUMP!
Apr 24, 2024 21:33:14 #
Gatsby wrote:
It was never about "crime and punishment" it is only about STOPPING TRUMP!
True.
Apr 25, 2024 09:06:08 #
crazylibertarian
Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
Lily wrote:
b 'Historic mistake': Law professor takes apart A... (show quote)
Alan Dershowitz and Julian Epstein, both Democrats and liberals of long standing, have also weighed in with the same opinions. Bragg & Letitia James should both be disbarred and prosecuted for this and their other outlandish case against Trump.
And anyone who supports these prosecutions should be subjected to the same.
Apr 25, 2024 10:50:01 #
crazylibertarian wrote:
Alan Dershowitz and Julian Epstein, both Democrats and liberals of long standing, have also weighed in with the same opinions. Bragg & Letitia James should both be disbarred and prosecuted for this and their other outlandish case against Trump.
And anyone who supports these prosecutions should be subjected to the same.
And anyone who supports these prosecutions should be subjected to the same.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.