Democrats are carrying out their 2024 election strategy.
But one absurdity could stop their attempts to tie up Donald Trump in court cases around the country.
And this Obama legal adviser floored Megyn Kelly with his admission about Alvin Bragg’s Trump hush money trial.
Former Obama legal advisor and O.J. Simpson attorney slammed outrageous fact about Bragg case
George Soros-backed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg campaigned on taking down Donald Trump, so he felt pressured to charge Trump with something, anything.
The best Bragg could come up with was creating a goofy legal theory that Trump lied on business filings by not reporting a hush money payoff to Stormy Daniels as a campaign expenditure.
The statute of limitations on the alleged crime expired, so Bragg used a federal statute to charge a state crime, which even liberal legal scholars have called a joke.
Legal expert Alan Dershowitz, who was part of O.J. Simpson’s “Dream Team,” said Bragg’s case was the worst he had ever seen.
Dershowitz also called it an “outrage” that the trial is not being televised.
The revolution will not be televised
During an appearance on Megyn Kelly’s podcast, Dershowitz said, “It’s an outrage that this case is not on television. The first case involved a criminal prosecution—a weak case. Why are we not entitled to see how bad this case is on television? Why do we have to listen to an analysis of it by CNN, MSNBC, and The New York Times?”
Since the trial is not on television, the left-wing press can shape the narrative and then express disbelief if the case goes sideways.
Dershowitz continued, “In the OJ case, there was a poll that was done. People who actually saw the case on television every day, were not surprised at the verdict. It’s people who read about it from The New York Times or from [Jeffrey] Toobin on CNN, who read about it or heard about it through biased reporting, that were absolutely shocked at the result. For example, they didn’t report on the fact that a sock had been tampered with and blood had been poured on it by Officer [Philip] Vannatter, because they didn’t. . .want the public to know that. And if you didn’t see it with your own eyes, you would say, ‘Oh, my God, how could these jurors have acquitted?’ But when you saw it, you would then understand why jurors after—four or five of them afterward—said we didn’t think he was innocent. We thought the police tampered with the evidence and we couldn’t trust the evidence. That’s why we acquitted. That’s why this case should be on television. It’s an absolute outrage, a violation of all of our rights, not to see every moment of this case, not to see the judge on trial, the prosecutor on trial, as well as the defendant on trial.”
Presiding Judge Juan Merchan is on the hot seat for deep partisanship—his daughter is fundraising off the case—so he is playing along with the Democrats’ strategy of playing up this hush money incident as the trial of the century.
In reality, this case is yet another nothing-burger.
Look out for the Democrat-controlled media to tell a completely different story.
Stay tuned to Unmuzzled News for any updates to this ongoing story.
