What is in the Trump indictment?

 Guy Benson:

...

Whatever you think of Trump, the indictment reeks. The fact that it's been sought is plainly and outrageously political, no matter how hard certain media outlets gaslight. With the caveat that it's currently sealed, and we haven't seen all of its substance, it's thus far been widely and rightly seen as a profoundly feeble case, with even the New York Times conceding that the legal theory behind it rests on a novel, "untested," and "risky" bank shot, requiring a convoluted effort to upgrade a possible misdemeanor into a low-level felony -- all spearheaded by a partisan ideologue who's notorious for downgrading criminal charges. Given the reality that the feds looked at this exact same set of facts and declined to pursue charges, even as they're coming after Trump from other angles, says it all. This is a deep blue city prosecutor weaponizing the law against a prominent member of the opposing party. It's an abuse of office. A former president has never been indicted in this country. This is very much not the way to make that history.

Politically, this is helpful to Trump, certainly in the near term. The party has been rallying around him every since this plot line developed, pushing him into the middle of the spotlight, where he likes to be. No one else is getting any oxygen. The base smells another (in this case, particularly rancid) witch hunt. Trump's current and expected primary opponents are issuing statements against Alvin Bragg's overreach. And that's not all. Because Bragg went first -- with three other grand jury probes into Trump looming -- the anti-Trump legal adventure starts on its weakest possible footing. It will now be easier for Team Trump to dismiss any future developments as "here we go again" piling on. They could say that the weird, fame-seeking grand jury foreperson in Georgia proves how politicized that process was. They could also reasonably question how charges could be brought against Trump on the classified documents matter, given the sitting president's problems on that front (to say nothing of the uncharged but illegal Hillary emails fiasco). There would be at least some, if not a lot of, truth to these points.
...

It is hard to find reports supporting this charge.   Most prosecutors avoid such a weak case against someone with the resources to defeat the charges.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more