OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is back in the spotlight this week — but not in a case involving former President Donald Trump.
Bragg, who brought the case that led to the indictment of Trump, announced the arrest of their last suspect allegedly involved in a string of assaults and robberies that are believed to be connected to the deaths of two men, Gothamist reported.
“Their motive — we allege — was simple: to make money,” Bragg said at a news conference at NYPD headquarters. “They approached people leaving bars and nightclubs late at night, engaged them in conversation, and offered them illicit and dangerous substances.”
“I cannot imagine how painful it is for the families of Mr. Ramirez and Mr. Umberger,” Bragg said. “My thoughts continue to be with them. It’s my sincere hope that today will bring some solace in the fact that our investigation has now led to these charges.”
The timing, of course, is of note.
Bragg’s press conference came after several House Republicans held a hearing on Monday in the area to speak with witnesses on the impact of soft-on-crime policies by district attorneys, including Alvin Bragg, on New Yorkers.
Bragg has come under heavy fire in recent weeks since Trump was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury.
The Manhattan grand jury indicted Trump on 34 criminal charges of falsifying business records related to adult film star Stormy Daniels.
Trump sent a payment to Daniels ahead of the 2016 election, allegedly to keep Daniels quiet about an affair the two of them had in 2006. Trump pleaded not guilty to all 34 charges.
Bragg has not had a ton to celebrate since he announced his case against Trump and now it got worse for him.
He sued Rep. Jim Jordan, the head of the House Judiciary Committee, to demand he stops “interfering” in a local prosecution. But as quick as he filed his lawsuit a judge for the Southern District of New York refused to even file a temporary restraining order, Mike Davis of The Federalist Society reported.
“Soros-funded Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s (frivolous) lawsuit against House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan is already off to a bad start for Bragg: The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York declined to even enter a temporary restraining order,” he said, showing a screenshot of the decision.
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) April 12, 2023
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) April 12, 2023
“Summary of Soros-funded Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s (frivolous) legal argument: Congress is interfering in Bragg’s misuse of federal funds and misuse of federal law to politically interfere in the next presidential election,” he said.
Summary of Soros-funded Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's (frivolous) legal argument:
Congress is interfering in Bragg's misuse of federal funds and misuse of federal law to politically interfere in the next presidential election.
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) April 12, 2023
In his suit, Bragg alleged that Jordan and the committee are attempting to wage an intimidation campaign over the indictment.
The D.A. said he’s taking legal action “in response to an unprecedently brazen and unconstitutional attack by members of Congress on an ongoing New York State criminal prosecution and investigation of” Trump, Fox News reported.
Fox News noted further:
Bragg, a Democrat, is asking a judge to invalidate subpoenas that Jordan, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has or plans to issue as part of an investigation of Bragg’s handling of the Trump case.
In recent weeks, the Judiciary Committee issued a subpoena seeking testimony from a former prosecutor, Mark Pomerantz, who previously oversaw the Trump investigation. The committee has also sought documents and testimony about the case from Bragg and his office. Bragg has rejected those requests.
A plethora of legal experts have come forward since Trump’s indictment and argued that Bragg’s case is exceptionally weak.
“The question to ask yourself in a case like this [is], ‘Would a case like this be brought against anybody else, whether he or she be president, former president or a regular citizen?’ The answer is… no,” Former Whitewater deputy counsel Sol Wisenberg said.
“You can debate all day long whether or not… Trump should be indicted related to the records at Mar-a-Lago, whether or not he should be indicted with respect to Jan. 6 incitement of lawless activity… Those are real crimes if they occurred, and he committed them,” he said. “This is preposterous.”
Ian Millhiser, a senior correspondent at Vox, wrote: “There is something painfully anticlimactic about Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s indictment of former President Trump. It concerns not Trump’s efforts to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States, but his alleged effort to cover up a possible extramarital affair with a porn star. And there’s a very real risk that this indictment will end in an even bigger anticlimax. It is unclear that the felony statute that Trump is accused of violating actually applies to him.”
Mark Stern, a writer for the liberal outlet Slate, published a story titled, “The Trump Indictment Is Not the Slam-Dunk Case Democrats Wanted.”
