top of page
Search

The Political Show Trial of President Donald Trump in the ‘Hush Money’ Matter

As legal scholar and constitutional lawyer Prof. Jonathan Turley put it so well in an op-ed for the New York Post, “Lawyers have been scouring the civil and criminal codes for any basis to sue or prosecute Trump before the upcoming 2024 election. This week will highlight the damage done to New York’s legal system because of this unhinged crusade. They’ve charged him with everything short of ripping a label off a mattress.”


Just a few weeks ago, another judge imposed a roughly half billion-dollar penalty in a case without a single victim who lost a single cent on loans with Trump. (Indeed, bank officials testified they wanted more business with the Trump organization).

 

Now Bragg is bringing a case that has taken years to develop and millions of dollars in litigation costs for all parties. That is all over an alleged crime from before the 2016 election that is a misdemeanor under a state law that had already expired under the statute of limitations.


And Prof. Turley is not the only one to examine the facts of this case and conclude that the prosecution of Mr. Trump is unprecedented and run by biased, anti-Trump Democratic Party politicians.



 Our friend Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued a statement that said in part:

 

Today’s s kangaroo court proceedings in the Manhattan Supreme Court mark the first-ever criminal trial of a U.S. president. Today is a sad day that will go down in infamy. This is a dangerous attack on the rule of law and a brazen attempt to rig the 2024 elections for President Biden and Democrats. Judicial Watch denounces Alvin Bragg’s corrupt attempt to make former president Donald Trump a political prisoner.


Trump committed no crimes, and this is a prosecution about “nothing.” These and other Democratic Party political prosecutions of Trump are an abomination under law and are destabilizing to our nation.


Judicial Watch will continue to expose in court the truth about these attacks on the rule of law, free and fair elections, and the U.S. Constitution.


And Judicial Watch brought the receipts to back-up Mr. Fitton’s claim that the “hush money” case is part of a broader political persecution of former President Trump.


Judicial Watch has several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuse targeting Trump:


In March 2024, Judicial Watch filed a Georgia Open Records Act lawsuit against District Attorney Fani Willis and Fulton County, Georgia, for records of any communication Willis and the county had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee. The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County after Willis and the County denied having any responsive records.


In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.


(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Special Counsel Jack Smith previously was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Jack Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.)


In January 2024, Judicial Watch filed lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, for records regarding the hiring of Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor by District Attorney Fani Willis. Wade was hired to pursue unprecedented criminal investigations and prosecutions against former President Trump and others over the 2020 election disputes.


In October 2023, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.


Through the New York Freedom of Information Law, in July 2023, Judicial Watch received the engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight investigation into Bragg’s unprecedented indictment of former President Donald Trump.


So, observed Prof. Turley, this is the case: A serial perjurer used to convert a dead state misdemeanor into a felony based on an alleged federal election crime that was rejected by the Justice Department.

 

Fortunately, witnesses are no longer required to put their hand on the bible in swearing to testify truthfully in court. Otherwise, the court would need the New York Fire Department standing by in case the book burst into flames.



  • American economy

  • jobs created

  • government jobs

  • labor market

  • health insurance cost

  • inflation

  • shrinkflation

  • savings rate

  • 2024 Election

  • New York legal system

  • Stormy Daniels

  • Alvin Bragg

  • Hush money case

  • Fani Willis

  • Special Counsel Jack Smith

  • Nathan Wade

111 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page