Legal Analysts from Both Sides Flatly Reject “Underwhelming” Sham Indictment Against President Trump

“CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero called the indictment “underwhelming” on air with Jake Tapper.

“In terms of a case that’s being brought against a former president, it’s a little underwhelming. There’s not more to it. There’s not more violations, tax violations,” said Cordero. “There’s not an incredible new set of facts that we didn’t know about publicly. It’s really the facts of this case, as they have existed for basically almost seven years.”

FOX News legal analyst and law professor Jonathan Turley predicted that Bragg’s case against President Trump would ‘collapse’ before it ever goes to trial.

“I’ve never seen an indictment like this one,” said Turley. “I know a lot of judges who would’ve been not too pleased to receive an indictment like this—who would have said ‘what the heck is this?’”

In an earlier interview on FOX News, Turley called Alvin Bragg’s case against President Trump “legally pathetic” and “a raw political prosecution.”

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andy McCarthy told FOX News that “If the judge does his job right, Trump’s case should be dismissed.”

Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz slammed Alvin Bragg’s political prosecution, characterizing the attack as “not justice in America.”

In a recent Daily Mail op-ed, Dershowitz wrote, “This indictment speaks to how laughable and blatantly political this prosecution really is. It’s a tragedy.”

Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo characterized the unsealed indictment as a “nothing burger” and exposed that the indictment doesn’t even describe a crime.

CNN Chief Law Enforcement Analyst John Miller said, ”we’ve kind of whipped ourselves up over the last week” over the indictment against former President Donald Trump and believed that there “must be more than what we know” but the indictment is “just the same stuff we already knew” about a seven-year-old case that “nobody” in the prosecutor’s office wanted to move forward with.

Former New York prosecutor and Judge Jeanine Pirro said, “This is a whole lot of nothing. First of all, the indictment is insufficient on its face… In addition, it is duplicitous— so nobody get excited about the 34 counts, they’re meaningless.”

“There’s no crime at all — at all,” Trump lawyer Joe Tacopina told CBS Mornings, “I mean, this is not a game. You’re charging the former president of the United States with crimes, crimes that will never be sustained in a court of law because they don’t exist.”

“There’s no new evidence. That’s spin,” said Tacopina on the TODAY show.

“I’ve read the statement of facts, it’s exactly what we talked about. Exactly what the United States Department of Justice—the federal prosecutors in Manhattan—turned down years ago. It’s exactly what the Federal Election Commission had said there’s no FEC violation here. It’s exactly what Cy Vance, the former prosecutor in that office turned down, three years ago. There’s no new evidence. This is just rehashing a zombie case.”

In a New York Post op-ed titled, “Is that really all there is to the Trump indictment? How pathetic,” FOX News contributor and New York Post columnist Michael Goodwin writes, “By making the former president look like a victim of a crooked prosecutor and a partisan system, the DA confirms for millions of Americans that Trump is all that stands between them and the authoritarian left that will stop at nothing to get and hold power.”

“Here’s the only thing non-lawyers need to know about this case—if after the 2020 election Donald Trump had announced that he was retiring from politics, Alvin Bragg would not have indicted him,” said attorney and FOX News host Laura Ingraham.

FOX Business’ Maria Bartiromo criticized Bragg’s office for leaking details of a sealed indictment, a felony offense in New York.

Prior to the judge’s decision to deny Bragg’s gag order, Dershowitz slammed Alvin Bragg.

“The prosecutor in New York City can’t be determining the outcome of an election. So, you can be sure that we will take the case to the Supreme Court if a gag order is imposed on behalf, not of Donald Trump, but on behalf of those of us who want to hear him talk.”

This political prosecution is so out-of-bounds that even Never Trumpers like Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, and disgraced FBI agent Andrew McCabe came to President Trump’s defense.”

This post has 1 comments.

The post Legal Analysts from Both Sides Flatly Reject “Underwhelming” Sham Indictment Against President Trump appeared first on The Desk of Donald Trump.

Statements by Donald J. Trump

The Desk of Donald Trump