Alvin Bragg, 'Reluctant Prosecutor'? Baloney!

No matter what some may try to make us believe - no matter what anyone on the left may try to convince us of - there was nothing "reluctant" about Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's politically motivated prosecution of Donald Trump. The notion that Bragg was somehow "reluctant" to do this is the purest of corral litter, suitable only for enriching lawns, and Politico really ought to know better:

The Harlem Democrat, who at times seemed like a reluctant participant in a trial he launched, secured a place in history as the first prosecutor to land the conviction of an American president.
It’s easily one of the most dazzling feats of jurisprudence the nation has seen — and the sort of accomplishment that could launch him on a political rocket ship to Washington. Indeed, the conviction Thursday drew immediate praise and gratitude from Democrats, who see the former president as a unique threat to democracy — while also intensifying attacks from his supporters and the freshly convicted candidate himself, who has called the case a “witch hunt” and a “sham trial” organized by President Joe Biden.

Horse squeeze. Bragg was champing at the bit to get Trump; it has been his raison d'etre ever since 2016,

As to the details of the case, well, as I've said repeatedly, I'm a biologist by education, not a lawyer, but I can turn to one of the nation's foremost legal and constitutional scholars, Alan Dershowitz, who has probably forgotten more constitutional law than anyone at Politico ever knew. Here is what he has to say about this conviction:

"My big disappointment is with the jury. Juries are supposed to be a check and balance on the excesses of prosecutors and judges. This jury failed its role of checking and balancing these excesses," Dershowitz said Friday on "Mornings with Maria."

The esteemed Mr. Dershowitz continued:

Dershowitz labeled the decision the "beginning of a war of weaponization of the criminal justice system." He also heavily scrutinized the 12-person jury, noting many were likely non-Trump voters.
"They were hand-picked by the judge and by the prosecutor to be anti-Trump. These were ‘get Trump’ jurors," he explained.
"These were jurors who voted between 85% and 90% not to allow Trump to be president, and they will do anything to prevent him from being president. And so their vote was the second vote on November against him being president. It wasn't a vote on the facts of the law of the case."

I would point out that, as far as legal minds go, Alvin Bragg isn't even on the same planet as Alan Dershowitz. And, I hasten to note, Mr. Dershowitz is no flaming right-wing MAGA type; he has been and is a liberal Democrat, who supported the candidacies of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. But he is nonetheless a man of principle, which Alvin Bragg is... not.

Previously on RedState: What’s Happening to Trump Can Happen to You

Dear Alvin Bragg: Jim Jordan and the Select Subcommittee on Weaponization Would Like a Word

Even Mitt Romney, hardly a Trump partisan, slammed the entire process.

"Bragg should have settled the case against Trump, as would have been the normal procedure. But he made a political decision," Romney told his biographer McKay Coppins, a writer at the Atlantic. His office confirmed the comments to Fox News Digital.
"Bragg may have won the battle, for now, but he may have lost the political war," he warned. "Democrats think they can put out the Trump fire with oxygen. It's political malpractice."

Meanwhile, in New York, rapes, robberies, and felony assaults are on the upswing, and Bragg's revolving-door justice system all too frequently sets the perps back out on the streets within hours.

Politico would have us believe that Alvin Bragg and his staff were somehow reluctant to set up this tissue of whoppers they concocted to one end: To keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office. In this, Bragg is supported by the Soros apparatus, as are many "progressive" district attorneys and prosecutors in deep-blue jurisdictions around the country.

No, Alvin Bragg was not reluctant to do this. If he were, he would have settled for some kind of a plea deal. But he wanted to push it to the extreme, to go for the prize of being the guy who got Trump; and for now, he is the guy who did that. But he has also done more to unite and anger the right in the United States than possibly anyone before him; he may well have just engaged in the greatest political miscalculation since Archduke Franz Ferdinand told his wife "You know what, dear, I'm going to go ahead with that trip to Sarajevo; I'm sure everything will be fine."

Now, the Biden campaign is losing some high-profile support, while Trump is still pulling ahead in the polls, and his allies are rallying around.

Nobody could have talked Bragg out of this. But he may not like what happens next; this case has awakened what Richard Nixon called "The Silent Majority," and while the results of this won't be known until November 5th, the initial indications are that Bragg made a big, bad mistake in pushing this case.

First Post-Verdict Poll Is Out - Watch Dems Tear Their Hair Out Over This

DeSantis: One Way or Another, Trump Will Be Able to Vote in Florida