Even the historically ‘Never Trump’ publication National Review has come out against Trump’s trial in Manhattan, pushed by far-left District Attorney Alvin Bragg. The magazine, founded by William F. Buckley, splashed an op-ed by Andrew McCarthy on Saturday, beginning: “The simple fact is that DA Alvin Bragg can’t prove his case.”
McCarthy explains:
Merchan should dismiss the case because it is already apparent that Bragg cannot prove criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt. After three weeks of the prosecution’s case, I now believe the evidence would be insufficient even if Bragg had charged only New York’s misdemeanor business-records-falsification offense. As for the felony offense, as to which prosecutors must prove willfulness beyond a reasonable doubt (a heightened standard of scienter, i.e., criminal intent), Bragg’s evidence is woefully inadequate.
He adds:
To sum up, Bragg’s proof of falsity is paltry. His proof of fraud is non-existent. And if he had a scintilla of proof that Trump was even thinking about federal campaign law, let alone willfully flouting it, then he would have spelled it out in an indictment rather than playing his unconstitutional game of “guess what the other crime is.”
McCarthy concludes:
Wholly independent of the plethora of constitutional infirmities in the prosecution, it should be thrown out for the most basic of reasons: Bragg can’t prove his case.
.jpg){kind=link}
