Liberal Forum

Alvin Bragg gets sued for concealing records of his case against President Trump

Freedom of Information request demanded answers about whether charges were 'partisan prosecution'

By Bob Unruh

August 13, 2024

 Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan prosecutor who took years-old misdemeanor business records charges for which the statute of limitations had expired, and made them felonies against President Donald Trump because he claimed they were done in furtherance of some other unspecified crime, now is facing a lawsuit for his actions.

It is America First Legal that has sued Bragg for refusing to turn over records of how he developed his case, whether he consulted with the Joe Biden administration in the case, and whether it was a "partisan prosecution" against the GOP presidential nominee.

At the time Trump was opposing Joe Biden in the 2024 presidential race. Since then, the elites of the Democrat party essentially tossed Biden under the bus and named Kamala Harris as his replacement.

The Washington Examiner notes the lawsuit came about because Bragg repeatedly refused to provide documentation about the case. Bragg's office now is accused of withholding, illegally, records in his case.

Daniel Epstein, an AFL vice president, said there shouldn't be anything hidden.

"If improper ex parte communications influenced what is supposed to be nonpartisan prosecutorial conduct, all Americans are at risk," he said.AFL has been investigating Bragg's case for months, and has focused on the communications inside and outside the D.A.'s office.

"The group's requests also sought records of interactions with high-profile figures such as Lanny Davis, a Democratic consultant and attorney for ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, who claimed credit for sparking the district attorney's investigation into Trump during an interview with Politico in March of last year," the report said.

The circumstances that Bragg used to develop the case had been rejected by other prosecutors as sufficient for charges. In fact, Bragg had made the same decision earlier, then under pressure to get Trump changed his mind.

Based on the testimony of a convicted perjurer, a jury in leftist Manhattan convicted Trump on 34 counts involving business records.

The case also has been left unsettled because of the Supreme Court's ruling that presidents have immunity from charges for many of the acts they take in office. It hasn't been determined how that ruling affects Bragg's claims. 

Full article:
Alvin Bragg gets sued for concealing records of his case against President Trump * WorldNetDaily * by Bob Unruh (wnd.com)
 

Buffalo » 14 Aug 2024, 6:55 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 6:55 am

Alvin Bragg gets sued for concealing records of his case against President Trump

Freedom of Information request demanded answers about whether charges were 'partisan prosecution'

By Bob Unruh

August 13, 2024

 Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan prosecutor who took years-old misdemeanor business records charges for which the statute of limitations had expired, and made them felonies against President Donald Trump because he claimed they were done in furtherance of some other unspecified crime, now is facing a lawsuit for his actions.

It is America First Legal that has sued Bragg for refusing to turn over records of how he developed his case, whether he consulted with the Joe Biden administration in the case, and whether it was a "partisan prosecution" against the GOP presidential nominee.

At the time Trump was opposing Joe Biden in the 2024 presidential race. Since then, the elites of the Democrat party essentially tossed Biden under the bus and named Kamala Harris as his replacement.

The Washington Examiner notes the lawsuit came about because Bragg repeatedly refused to provide documentation about the case. Bragg's office now is accused of withholding, illegally, records in his case.

Daniel Epstein, an AFL vice president, said there shouldn't be anything hidden.

"If improper ex parte communications influenced what is supposed to be nonpartisan prosecutorial conduct, all Americans are at risk," he said.AFL has been investigating Bragg's case for months, and has focused on the communications inside and outside the D.A.'s office.

"The group's requests also sought records of interactions with high-profile figures such as Lanny Davis, a Democratic consultant and attorney for ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, who claimed credit for sparking the district attorney's investigation into Trump during an interview with Politico in March of last year," the report said.

The circumstances that Bragg used to develop the case had been rejected by other prosecutors as sufficient for charges. In fact, Bragg had made the same decision earlier, then under pressure to get Trump changed his mind.

Based on the testimony of a convicted perjurer, a jury in leftist Manhattan convicted Trump on 34 counts involving business records.

The case also has been left unsettled because of the Supreme Court's ruling that presidents have immunity from charges for many of the acts they take in office. It hasn't been determined how that ruling affects Bragg's claims. 

Full article:
Alvin Bragg gets sued for concealing records of his case against President Trump * WorldNetDaily * by Bob Unruh (wnd.com)

This is ****.

Based on the testimony of a convicted perjurer, a jury in leftist Manhattan convicted Trump on 34 counts involving business records.

The witness who turned Grifty's offenses into felonies is Hope Hicks.

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am

This is ****.

The witness who turned Grifty's offenses into felonies is Hope Hicks.

the bitch hicks lied
 

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am

This is ****.

The witness who turned Grifty's offenses into felonies is Hope Hicks.

**** you, ***!!!  *** da bragg is still being sued!!!  The whole case was just farfetched lawfare to get Trump!!!
 

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am

This is ****.

The witness who turned Grifty's offenses into felonies is Hope Hicks.

PROVE IT, CURB STOMPED ****!!

GO!!

Beekeeper » 14 Aug 2024, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 8:26 am

PROVE IT, CURB STOMPED ****!!

GO!!

Before I type out a history lesson, can you tell me why Hope testified?

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 8:28 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 8:28 am

Before I type out a history lesson, can you tell me why Hope testified?

Because she was SUBPEONED TO TESTIFY!!

WHY do you ask such STUPID **** QUESTIONS, DICKBREATH??

Beekeeper » 14 Aug 2024, 8:32 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 8:32 am

Because she was SUBPEONED TO TESTIFY!!

WHY do you ask such STUPID **** QUESTIONS, DICKBREATH??

"Subpoenaed"..

I'm not typing out the lesson.

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 8:35 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 8:35 am

"Subpoenaed"..

I'm not typing out the lesson.

You have no lesson, DICKBREATH!! TYPOS HAPPEN. Even Einstein was prone to MASSIVE TYPOS!! 

Now run along like the good little PIECE OF NAZI **** YOU ARE!!
 

Beekeeper » 14 Aug 2024, 8:56 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 8:56 am

You have no lesson, DICKBREATH!! TYPOS HAPPEN. Even Einstein was prone to MASSIVE TYPOS!! 

Now run along like the good little PIECE OF NAZI **** YOU ARE!!

In testimony relating to another matter, Hope stated she was present at a meeting where the issue of Stormy, and the reason for the payment, was discussed by Grifty and others.

This negated the limitation question and provided the basis for the step up to the federal election violation.


Nod.

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am

This is ****.


The witness who turned Grifty's offenses into felonies is Hope Hicks.

 

I don't recall what that underlying felony was.  

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 7:08 am

This is ****.

The witness who turned Grifty's offenses into felonies is Hope Hicks.

Stupid ***, doesn't matter.  The sham case will be overturned on appeal!!!
 

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 9:04 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 9:04 am

In testimony relating to another matter, Hope stated she was present at a meeting where the issue of Stormy, and the reason for the payment, was discussed by Grifty and others.

This negated the limitation question and provided the basis for the step up to the federal election violation.

Nod.

And she ALSO testified that the handling of the Stormy issue was TO PROTECT THE FAMILY, DICKWEED!!

Or did you miss that one too???

AS A FYI, NDA's are NOT ILLEGAL. So there were no 'negating the limitation question" in ANY MANNER. NOR did BRAGG prove that any FEDERAL LAW was violated in terms of anything that HE CLAIMS is the "step up crime" needed to produce a felony charge!!

Seems your knowledge of this entire case is based on the **** you handlers blew up that NASTY **** *** of yours. NO FACTS, just the gaslighting your handlers ALWAYS DO!!

Beekeeper » 14 Aug 2024, 10:03 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 10:03 am

And she ALSO testified that the handling of the Stormy issue was TO PROTECT THE FAMILY, DICKWEED!!

Or did you miss that one too???

AS A FYI, NDA's are NOT ILLEGAL. So there were no 'negating the limitation question" in ANY MANNER. NOR did BRAGG prove that any FEDERAL LAW was violated in terms of anything that HE CLAIMS is the "step up crime" needed to produce a felony charge!!

Seems your knowledge of this entire case is based on the **** you handlers blew up that NASTY **** *** of yours. NO FACTS, just the gaslighting your handlers ALWAYS DO!!

Not interested in your quick gloss bs.

You don't understand anything. 

 

*Huey » 14 Aug 2024, 9:08 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 9:08 am

I don't recall what that underlying felony was.

There were 3 step ups, one of them federal.

This has been explained to you, with citations, repeatedly.

Your impervious ignorance is of your own insistence.
 

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 10:14 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 10:14 am

There were 3 step ups, one of them federal.

This has been explained to you, with citations, repeatedly.

Your impervious ignorance is of your own insistence.

Sure.

You still can't name the underlying crime.  

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 10:11 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 10:11 am

Not interested in your quick gloss bs.

You don't understand anything.

Oh, we ALL UNDERSTAND that you have been CURB STOMPED MASSIVELY ON LOTS OF TOPICS THIS MORNING!!

Need a break so you can go bandage that BLISTERED *** of yours???

                               

Beekeeper » 14 Aug 2024, 10:16 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 10:16 am

Oh, we ALL UNDERSTAND that you have been CURB STOMPED MASSIVELY ON LOTS OF TOPICS THIS MORNING!!

Need a break so you can go bandage that BLISTERED *** of yours???

                             

You didn't even know why she was testifying.

When told you ran a google search and came up with a bunch of irrelevant jive.

Now you declare victory.



 

Blackvegetable » 14 Aug 2024, 10:19 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 10:19 am

You didn't even know why she was testifying.

When told you ran a google search and came up with a bunch of irrelevant jive.

Now you declare victory.

No, I followed the TRIAL TRANSCRIPT and now I can DECLARE ABSOLUTELY TOTAL SURRENDER FROM YOU AND VICTORY TABOOT!!

Please, take your CURB STOMPED *** and find a new playground since NO ONE HERE thinks you are anything but a **** ASSHOLE THAT LOVES TO SUCK COCK!!

*Huey » 14 Aug 2024, 10:16 am » wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2024, 10:16 am

Sure.

You still can't name the underlying crime.

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/ch ... e-v.-trump


The Potential Object Offenses: Federal Election Law

Merchan held that Bragg may not point to Cohen’s guilty plea or the Justice Department or FEC agreements with AMI as themselves evidence of Trump’s guilt, but that the district attorney may offer “testimony about the underlying facts … provided the proper foundation is laid.”