The New York Times managed to do something that seems like it should be impossible. They pretty much the destroyed New York Attorney General’s indictment of Donald Trump, and they somehow managed to blame the whole thing on former President Trump.
The tide in much of the press recently has focused on the fact that this case is a mess. Now the NYT is agreeing that the whole thing is a fiasco.
For instance, in the Atlantic, writer Quinta Jurecic expounds on how bad of a character Trump is but then says this, “Separate from the legal merits of the Manhattan case against Trump, the underlying conduct at issue (paying hush money to improve Trump’s chances in the 2016 election) is … actually quite bad.”
Translation…no legal merits, just a bad man.
New York Times writer, Jed Handelsman Shugerman, who is a law professor at both Fordham and Boston University, called the case a “legal embarrassment” in his headline.
“The 34-count indictment — which more accurately could be described as 34 half-indictments — was a disaster. It was a setback for the rule of law and established a dangerous precedent for prosecutors. The case appears so weak on its legal and jurisdictional basis that a state judge might dismiss the case and mitigate that damage. More likely, the case is headed to federal court for a year, where it could lose on the grounds of federal pre-emption — only federal courts have jurisdiction over campaign finance and filing requirements.”
Then, just to underscore his impressions, Shugerman gives us this assessment. “Instead of the rule of law, it would be the rule of the circus.”
Translation: Bragg and the legal system were provoked into offending the law because of Trump.
The NYT is basically the bully on the ballfields yelling, “Look at what you made me do.”
