(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Why DA Alvin Bragg Delayed Charging Trump [1]
['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.', 'Backgroundurl Avatar_Large', 'Nickname', 'Joined', 'Created_At', 'Story Count', 'N_Stories', 'Comment Count', 'N_Comments', 'Popular Tags']
Date: 2022-12-07
Some hot-heads may owe this man an apology.
Suppose you wanted to charge someone of using their family business to defraud taxpayers, based on a lot of evidence. And you had already worked to shut down their charity and his fake university due to fraud, so you believed that your criminal case had a reasonable chance of success. Let’s say that the tax fraud applied in your city, your state and your country, but you only had city jurisdiction, the state filed a civil case and the DOJ is still catching up. Why might you want to delay those charges, even if some hot-headed folks might suspect that you were corrupt, stupid or both?
Hmm, let’s see if I can find a completely unrelated clip of a hot-head arguing that a DA should have charged someone years ago, just to illustrate the theory. Oh, how lucky, here’s Michael Cohen arguing just that way in the completely unrelated case yesterday.
Hypothetically, if the target had accused both you and the state’s AG of being motivated by politics and had been avoiding testifying in the civil case; how might that figure into your calculus? Also, imagine that your key witness, the CFO, adamantly refused to testify against the target but was willing to testify against the target’s family business; how might that inform your strategy?
Well, you might want to help the civil case AG dispense with the target’s spurious objections to testifying, since she could make use of adverse inference if the target pleads the 5th in her case. So, temporarily appearing to back away from criminally indicting the target might take some of the wind out of the target’s lawsuit against her that both your and her actions against the target are politically motivated.
And if you could first secure a conviction against the CFO, in return for his help in convicting the target’s family business, then you would be able to establish both that the target’s CFO had conspired to commit various frauds that benefited the target’s company over 15 years while under direct micro-managing supervision by the target and that the target’s family business had also conspired in the fraud, including falsifying documents that the target had initialed. That would not only help you more easily make your case against him, but it would also help the state AG make her case, since it’s based on the target using such documents to misrepresent his business for fraudulent benefits.
And since both your cases are now supported by jury verdicts that the target’s CFO and his family business are guilty of tax fraud conspiracy to the target’s benefit and apparently with his awareness, you would both have to proceed with your cases against the target, without any consideration of politics. Acting in such a methodical, strategic and effective manner might be the best way to achieve justice against the target in the long run. In theory.
Wouldn’t it be great if I could find another clip of a DA reassuring doubters that he in fact never stopped investigating the target and is still working diligently to charge the target (assuming that’s where the facts lead) in the completely unrelated case. Oh, what do you know….
Hmm, now I have to consider whether an imaginary DOJ AG might be similarly methodical, strategic and ultimately effective. I wonder….
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/12/7/2140578/-Why-DA-Alvin-Bragg-Delayed-Charging-Trump
Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/