Northeast
Bragg’s absurd case against Trump finally gets its undeserved day in court
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Absent an eleventh-hour reprieve from a higher court, Donald Trump will become the first U.S. president to face a criminal trial when it commences on Monday in New York.
Let the circus begin.
The ringmaster of the Big Top clown show is Alvin Bragg, the progressive Manhattan district attorney who campaigned — unethically — on the promise to bring down Trump. Once in office, Bragg inflated a time-barred and nominal misdemeanor into a multitude of dubious felonies by mangling evidence and contorting the law.
TRUMP REQUEST TO DELAY HUSH-MONEY TRIAL DENIED FOR THIRD TIME
With a wave of his showman’s cane, Bragg transformed a singular transaction into 34 separate charges in what’s known as “count stacking” that no good prosecutor would ever do. It’s a transparent window into an otherwise opaque case.
Former President Donald Trump, left, squares off against progressive Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg starting April 15. Photographer: Mary Altaffer/AP/Bloomberg via Getty Images (Getty Images)
The gravamen of the indictment is that in 2016 Trump used his lawyer to pay money to Stephanie Clifford (a.k.a. Stormy Daniels) in exchange for her silence about a purported affair that occurred a decade earlier, that he incorrectly recorded the payments in business records, and that all of it violated election laws, even though it did not.
Bragg surely knows his case is specious, at best. But it doesn’t matter. He’s counting on the sympathies of a liberal trial judge, Juan Merchan, and the venom of a jury pool destined to be dominated by Trump-hating New Yorkers. The once-respected standard of an “impartial jury” is being treated as a mere inconvenience instead of a constitutional right.
It is self-evident to many that the charges against the former president would be brought against no one else not named Trump. The fact that he is the leading candidate for president in the upcoming election is the only reason he is being persecuted under the guise of prosecution.
Even the left-leaning New York Times “could “identify only two other felony cases in Manhattan over the past decade in which defendants were indicted on charges of falsifying business records but no other crime.” This makes the DA’s legal theory not just untested, but absurd.
It is also an archetype of unequal justice. In the same 2016 election, Hillary Clinton secretly paid for the phony Steele dossier by using a lawyer to funnel the money while misreporting it as “legal expenses.” She was fined by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), but never prosecuted. Trump, however, is a disfavored Republican, so he is treated differently.
The most curious — and corrupt — aspect of Bragg’s case is that he still has not identified what underlying crime Trump supposedly committed. This, of course, is required under the Sixth Amendment. But no one, least of all Merchan, seems the least bit bothered by it. His honor ruled that Bragg had presented “legally sufficient evidence” to proceed. Okay, but under what law exactly?
In his malign indictment, the DA vaguely accuses Trump of “violating election laws” without specifying which ones were transgressed. No applicable statutes are set forth. The reason for the masquerade is obvious — in a state case, a local prosecutor has no authority to charge federal crimes allegedly committed during the course of a federal election. Period.
Stormy Daniels sat down with Piers Morgan for an interview available on Fox Nation (Fox News)
None of that is stopping Bragg or his sycophant judge. The DA asserts that any payments to Daniels were illegal campaign donations. Forget the fact that the FEC investigated Trump and concluded that said payments do not constitute unlawful donations. Never mind that the Department of Justice also studied the same expenditures and decided that no crimes were committed. Even Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus Vance, chose not to charge Trump at the end of his years-long investigation.
It is well established that money paid in exchange for non-disclosure agreements (or NDAs, as they’re known) is perfectly legal and quite common. Corporations and individuals do it every day. You can assign the pejorative term of “hush money” if you want. But it is often a normal conclusion to settlement agreements and even encouraged by judges who are motivated to resolve lawsuits that clog their courts.
However, Bragg is insistent that since Trump’s then-attorney, Michael Cohen, pled guilty to a federal charge of making an illegal campaign contribution, then that somehow makes Trump guilty, too. It does not. There are two reasons for this. First, the plea of one person does not determine the guilt of another. Second, Cohen willingly pled guilty to a non-crime offered up by federal prosecutors to gain leniency in his sentencing for other crimes he committed, including fraud.
In the end, Cohen was shipped off to the hoosegow for telling so many whoppers that you’d need a calculator to keep track. Yet, Bragg has no reservations in featuring an inveterate and confessed perjurer as his star witness against Trump. The same has been said of Daniels, who peddled inconsistent stories about her putative relationship while preening for cameras in numerous interviews.
The only credible case that Bragg could bring against Trump is falsely representing an NDA reimbursement as a payment for legal services to Cohen. But even that improbable legal theory (which requires evidence of an “intent to defraud” that is difficult to prove) constitutes a mere misdemeanor.
Moreover, it is barred by the statute of limitations that expired four years before the indictment. So, to circumvent the extinct statute, Bragg is cleverly twisting the law by attaching the misdemeanor to a felony that has not lapsed, but over which he has no jurisdiction.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
A conscientious and able judge would have long ago halted Bragg’s abusive machinations. But Merchan is neither. Instead, he is blithely enabling the district attorney’s illicit scheme to “get Trump” by ignoring fundamental rules of law, as well as his own duty to see that justice is fairly administered.
The charges against Trump are a prime example of selective prosecution driven by political animus. It is a patently partisan attempt to interfere in a presidential election. Manipulating the legal system by bringing a slew of spurious criminal charges against an opponent to delegitimize his candidacy is reprehensible “lawfare.”
It is self-evident to many that the charges against the former president would be brought against no one else not named Trump. The fact that he is the leading candidate for president in the upcoming election is the only reason he is being persecuted under the guise of prosecution.
It has gained in popularity, especially among media handmaidens who have happily embraced the righteous cause by declaring Trump guilty in the court of public opinion before any trial has ever begun.
Will their chicanery work? I doubt it.
What Biden Democrats and the liberal press underestimate is the intelligence of American voters. They see the dirty tricks of Alvin Bragg, Georgia DA Fani Willis, special counsel Jack Smith, and Attorney General Merrick Garland for exactly what they are — a pernicious attempt to steal an election through an abuse of our legal system.
Instead of ruining Trump, their antics have fortified his popular support. A growing number of people see the former president not as a villain, but as a victim of unscrupulous political enemies who weaponized the law to destroy him.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GREGG JARRETT
Read the full article from Here
The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Michael Capeci is the former chairman of the Bangor GOP.
Let’s be honest about Maine’s current state.
For many families, the cost of living has become unsustainable. Housing is out of reach for many young people. Energy bills keep rising. Many small businesses are struggling under taxes and regulations that make it harder to grow. Rural hospitals are under strain and despite years of increased state spending, the results are not showing up in people’s daily lives.
Concurrently, Maine continues to lose young workers to other states. That is not a statistic, it is a warning sign.
To me, the question in this Republican primary for governor is not about slogans. It is whether we continue with a political approach that has failed to reverse these trends, or whether we nominate someone with new ideas. I think that someone is Owen McCarthy.
Owen is not a political insider. He is an entrepreneur from Patten, a small town where opportunity is not assumed, it is built. He grew up in a working-class family, became the first in his family to graduate from college graduating from the University of Maine, and founded MedRhythms, a healthcare technology company focused on neurological treatment.
He didn’t just talk about opportunity. He built it. That distinction matters, because Maine’s problem is not a lack of debate it is a lack of results. We have seen the trajectory: higher costs, slower growth, and a steady outmigration of young workers. I believe Owen McCarthy represents a break from that pattern.
His Maine 2040 plan focuses on creating 50,000 new jobs in sectors where Maine has real advantages — maritime and defense, advanced forest products, and life sciences. These are export-driven industries tied directly to Maine’s workforce, geography, and institutions. What sets Owen apart is not only what he proposes, but how he approaches governing.
He prioritizes modernizing permitting so projects do not stall. He supports using technology to reduce costs and increase efficiency. He focuses on making it easier to build, hire, and expand in Maine.
That same practical mindset extends to healthcare. Expanding telehealth, strengthening EMS systems, improving provider flexibility, and shifting toward earlier intervention are not abstract reforms. They are system upgrades designed to improve access while controlling costs.
Maine voters consistently respond to competence. They reward candidates who understand problems and present plans to solve them. I believe they are tired of rhetoric that does not translate into results, and skeptical of politics that prioritizes messaging over execution.
Owen’s approach is grounded in solving the issues that shape daily life — affordability, healthcare access, job creation, and government efficiency. That is not just policy positioning. It is a governing model that speaks directly to voters.
Some will point to his lack of political experience. But I believe Maine’s core problems are not the result of insufficient political experience; they are the result of policies that have failed to deliver measurable improvement. Experience inside a broken system, by itself, is not a solution.
If Republicans want to win, this primary must be taken seriously. From my perspective, it is not about choosing a nominee for governor who can energize the base. It is about selecting someone who can compete in a broader electorate that is frustrated and looking for change.
That requires a candidate who can speak beyond the base, not by abandoning principles, but by demonstrating competence and a credible plan to address Maine’s challenges. I believe Owen McCarthy offers that combination. He represents a shift away from managed decline and toward economic execution.
This is not just another primary. It is a decision about whether Republicans position themselves to win Maine or whether they remain trapped in a cycle of repeating the same strategies and expecting different outcomes.
If Republicans want to compete for Maine’s future, they cannot afford to nominate a candidate who only motivates part of the electorate. They need someone who expands it.
I believe Owen McCarthy is that candidate.
And if the goal is to win Maine, then the choice should be unmistakable
Massachusetts
Massachusetts high school under investigation after teachers diagnosed with breast cancer
A Massachusetts high school is under investigation after “several” teachers have been diagnosed with breast cancer or precancerous conditions.
The state Department of Public Health is set to visit Uxbridge High School on Thursday to “conduct a series of air quality tests,” to determine whether the multiple cases are potentially connected.
Superintendent David Ljungberg and Principal Michael Rubin alerted families and district staff on Monday of the “sombering news,” after Uxbridge High School’s graduation over the weekend.
“We are writing to inform you about a concern we are investigating at Uxbridge High School,” Ljungberg and Rubin stated in the letter. “Several female teachers have been diagnosed with breast cancer or precancerous conditions over the past few years.”
“It is, of course, possible that these multiple cases are not connected to one another,” the leaders added, “but out of abundance of caution, we are looking into any environmental factors at the school that may be a factor in their diagnoses.”
The 123,000-square-foot school, with an enrollment of roughly 600, was constructed in 2012 at a cost of $45 million, including a $22-million state reimbursement.
Uxbridge school leaders say they notified the state Department of Health and local health board as soon as they became aware of the cases, seeking “counsel about how best to proceed.”
“Massachusetts DPH officials have indicated that there is no evidence of immediate danger in the building and no reason to limit access to or use of the facility at this time,” they wrote in their letter. “In fact, the public health officials have commended our decision to approach them with these concerns, our readiness to partner with them in support of the evaluation process.”
Health officials are assessing the school’s interior and exterior to “ensure there are no issues with the infrastructure that would present risks (including electrical, plumbing, mechanical, HVAC, and other systems)” and the indoor and outdoor air quality on campus.
The superintendent and principal said that state officials have ruled out water supply as a “risk factor” after “thorough testing.”
“The team has reached out to the women who have been diagnosed, requesting data to evaluate whether there may be a connection among their cases,” Ljungberg and Rubin wrote. “We are grateful for their cooperation.”
They added that the state has said discovering an environmental “smoking gun” is “rare” in workplace investigations.
“However, even if a direct causal link is not established,” the leaders wrote, “the administration is utilizing this process to rigorously test the building and guarantee that it meets all safety standards moving forward.”
-
Arkansas4 minutes agoArkansas driver’s licenses and state IDs now available in Apple Wallet
-
California11 minutes agoCalifornia’s race for governor and other key primaries remain unsettled as vote count continues
-
Colorado14 minutes agoColorado community reels after police say driver with revoked license hits three pedestrians, killing one
-
Connecticut19 minutes agoNight forecast for June 2
-
Delaware26 minutes agoThomas Jefferson University to run Delaware’s first medical school
-
Florida29 minutes agoMan accused of kidnapping woman at Wawa in Central Florida
-
Georgia34 minutes ago5 things to know about Georgia mosquito problem amid heat, drought
-
Hawaii41 minutes agoHawaii weather: USGS revised 4.6 magnitude earthquake off Kona coast, south swell, passing showers
