Jonathan Turley: This Is The 'Irony' Surrounding A Trump Indictment

When it comes to the case against former president Donald Trump, there has been much debate about whether it is a criminal prosecution or a political one. Constitutional law attorney Jonathon Turley believes that it falls more into the realm of a political prosecution. He argues that previous prosecutors, including the Department of Justice, rejected the claim and decided not to pursue it. Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan District Attorney, is attempting to turn a state misdemeanor into a federal alleged crime that the federal government had previously passed on. This move is not only troubling for judges but also raises questions about the statute of limitations. The misdemeanor has a two-year statute of limitations, which expired seven years ago. Bragg needs to bootstrap this case into a felony to have any chance of bringing it to trial.

The Least Serious Threat?

Some analysts argue that the case in Manhattan poses the least serious threat to Trump, compared to three other potential criminal charges he may face. However, the irony is that if Trump had to choose one of these "torpedoes" to hit, he would likely choose this one. By politicizing the criminal justice system, Bragg has inadvertently provided Trump with proof that his narrative is correct. Other potential charges against Trump, such as those related to Mar-a-Lago, are more conventional crimes with well-established theories of culpability. Bragg's actions undermine these other cases and empower Trump in a significant way.

Michael Cohen's Testimony and Credibility

When it comes to Michael Cohen's testimony, it is important to consider his credibility. Cohen has a history of being a serial liar, and Robert Costello, Trump's attorney, referred to his actions as the "Michael Cohen Revenge Tour." Cohen has lied about various aspects of this case in the past, which raises doubts about his veracity. However, it is worth considering why Cohen would lie to the grand jury now. Cohen has relied on his flexibility when it comes to morals and ethics in the past, which has been advantageous for his clients. Despite his checkered history, Cohen does possess insider knowledge that could be crucial to the prosecution's case.

The Problematic Exchange and Alvin Bragg's Strategy

One issue with Cohen's public testimony is that it goes against what prosecutors would prefer. Cohen's involvement in these types of questions and his assertion of a waiver of attorney-client privilege is unusual. The discrepancy between Cohen's statements and Costello's presentation of the waiver could potentially harm Cohen's credibility. Bragg's decision to pursue this case amid the controversy surrounding Cohen weakens the overall narrative against Trump. By leading with this move, Bragg has put himself in a difficult position, especially considering his earlier concerns about the case. The involvement of dubious witnesses, such as a disbarred lawyer and a porn star, further raises questions about the strength of the prosecution's case.

In conclusion, the Alvin Bragg case against Donald Trump raises legitimate concerns about whether it is a political prosecution rather than a criminal one. The decision to pursue this case amidst doubts and controversy weakens the overall impact of the prosecution. With other potential criminal charges against Trump, the Manhattan case may indeed pose the least serious threat. However, Bragg's actions unintentionally lend credibility to Trump's claims of a politicized criminal justice system. Whether this case will hold up in court remains to be seen, but it is clear that it has already sparked significant debate and scrutiny.