ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Now we’ve seen the laughable indictment – and it’s utterly flawed. But I fear a Manhattan jury with Trump Derangement Syndrome will unfairly convict Donald anyway… that would be a travesty of justice

The most anticipated indictment in modern history has been released. And, believe it or not, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg found an alleged crime.

Only it’s not the supposed offense that he’s prosecuting.

The only potential criminal wrongdoing identified after months of investigation by experienced professional prosecutors appears to be extortion.

But I’m talking about extortion of Trump, not by Trump. That’s what it’s called when an individual threatens to release damaging information about someone else unless they’re paid to keep quiet.

Now, of course, I’m not calling for Stormy Daniels to be prosecuted. I wish her only the best. But this indictment speaks to how laughable and blatantly political this prosecution really is. It’s a tragedy. 

Bragg labored mightily – ultimately he produced a mouse.

Read the indictment documents for yourself. At first glance, the layman may assume that it holds some evidence of wrongdoing. 34 counts laid out over 13-pages of an accompanying statement and couched in intimidating legalese.

As expected, the central narrative focuses on the payment of hush money to a former porn in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement. But the document also broadens out the alleged Trump scheme to include payments to suppress the story of a former Trump Tower doorman, who was peddling an unconfirmed and likely false story of a child that Trump fathered out-of-wedlock, and another payment to former Playboy model Karen McDougal to hide the tale of her alleged extra-marital affair with Trump.

Now look closer. All 34 counts are relatively similar. Bragg has sliced the salami very thin. In essence, this is a case about book-keeping.

The only potential criminal wrongdoing identified after months of investigation by experienced professional prosecutors appears to be extortion. But I’m talking about extortion of Trump, not by Trump.

Bragg labored mightily – ultimately he produced a mouse.

Trump is accused of not accurately recording hush money payments on public financial documents.

Consider how ridiculous that is. As I’ve written before, while immoral, such payments are legal and, in fact, common among high-profile people. It is also not uncommon to withhold why the actual hush money is paid. Obviously, to do so would be to disclose that which the hush money was paid to keep hush.

And in order to turn these questionable financial misdemeanors into even more questionable felonies, Bragg has alleged that the reason Trump made the false entries was to cover up other crimes.

Here the indictment is at its weakest.

Tellingly, the document itself does not even specify which crimes Trump tried to cover up. Although the law doesn’t require it, such specifications are often provided in indictments.

Bragg’s theory is that Trump concealed the true purpose of these payments, which Bragg alleges was done to protect Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, rather than to hide the adulterous affairs from his wife, children, and business associates or shield his brand.

But there’s no apparent evidence to support Bragg’s claim beyond the questionable evidence of Michael Cohen.

Moreover, in order for Bragg’s theory to hold water, Trump would have had to have known that he was committing a crime to benefit his campaign when he allegedly made the false entries.

But how could he possibly have known that he would benefit? 

In the end, the revelation of his consensual adulterous affair with Daniels got out anyway – but it did not turn the election to Hillary Clinton. I wish it had. 

I am a Hillary Clinton supporter. I voted for her, and I contributed to her campaign.

But Trump won.

For his part, Bragg attempted to play the hero at his news conference following the indictment.

He looked the American people in the eye and claimed that he was acting in good faith to fulfill the mission of his Manhattan office overseeing the business capital of the world.

‘We regularly bring cases involving false business statements,’ he claimed.

That’s totally disingenuous.

I challenge you, DA Bragg. Find me one example of someone prosecuted for paying hush money and not having recorded it on business records.

The case doesn’t exist.

Why? Because responsible prosecutors generally don’t prosecute crimes where there is no victim.

Bragg’s theory is that Trump concealed the true purpose of these payments, which Bragg alleges was done to protect Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, rather than to hide the adulterous affairs from his wife, children, and business associates or shield his brand.

Now, of course, I’m not calling for Stormy Daniels to be prosecuted. I wish her only the best. But this indictment speaks to how laughable and blatantly political this prosecution really is. It’s a tragedy.

Stormy Daniels is not a victim. She willingly accepted Trump’s money.

The American people are not victims. They elected Trump regardless of his behavior.

Ironically, Bragg – who has failed to go after criminal predators in the streets – has devoted time and resources, which could have been spent going after real killers and rapists and Ponzi schemers to instead go after a man for a victimless, alleged crime.

Clearly, none of the matters to Bragg. He finally has the case that he told the voters of Manhattan he would deliver to them.

During the 2021 race to elect the next Manhattan District Attorney, a New York Times headline blared, ‘Two Leading Manhattan D.A. Candidates Face the Trump Question.’ As the article noted, Bragg wore his animosity towards Trump on his sleeve.

‘I have investigated Trump and his children and held them accountable for their misconduct with the Trump Foundation,’ Mr. Bragg told a December 2020 candidate forum. ‘I know how to follow the facts and hold people in power accountable.”

In November 2021, Bragg was elected.

Now, those same voters will make up the pool from which Trump’s jury will be selected.

And by voting to convict Trump, these future jurors would help Bragg to fulfill the pledge he made to them.

This does not seem to assure a fair trial. 

The anti-Trump passions in New York City are incredible. I’ve experienced them myself.

My acquaintance of many years, Caroline Kennedy, told me at a dinner party: ‘Alan, if I had known you, who have defended Trump on the floor of the Senate, was going to be at this dinner party, I would not have come. But I am too polite to get up and leave now.’

A friend, comedian Larry David, confronted me outside a store shouting, ‘Alan, you’re disgusting,’ over my defense of Trump.

Despite our friendship, they were furious with me, because I simply disagreed with them. You cannot reason with people, who have Trump Derangement Syndrome.

My acquaintance of many years, Caroline Kennedy, told me at a dinner party: ‘Alan, if I had known you, who have defended Trump on the floor of the Senate, was going to be at this dinner party, I would not have come. But I am too polite to get up and leave now.’

The anti-Trump passions in New York City are incredible. I’ve experienced them myself.

That is why Trump’s lawyers will undoubtedly appeal to the judge for a change of venue, which Bragg will strenuously oppose. The last thing he wants is a fair trial. He wants a trial that will allow him to realize his campaign promise.

This case should be moved to one of the New York City boroughs, such as Staten Island, or to another part of New York state. But the judge, also an elected Democrat, is unlikely to grant that request.

The American legal system took a body blow yesterday.

Trump’s appearance in a courtroom to become the first former president and the first current presidential candidate ever to be indicted, arrested and charged marked a sad departure from precedent. And this deeply flawed indictment will now create a new precedent under which elected prosecutors of both parties will search for possible crimes against their political opponents.

Whatever the outcome of this Bragg prosecution, Trump should eventually prevail. An appeals court should never uphold such an obvious misapplication of the law.

But I don’t know if the American legal system can come back from this as easily. This is a perversion of justice. And if Trump is convicted, it will be a travesty of justice.

Americans everywhere now have cause for concern, because today it is Trump – but tomorrow it could be you.

Source: Read Full Article