We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Fox News legal analyst and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley believes that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is wading into uncharted territory.

In an op-ed for the New York Post, Turley spoke about Bragg’s case, which involves allegations of a “hush money” scheme and cover-up.

Turley called Bragg’s case against Trump “legally obscene.”

“For many of us in the legal community, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against former President Donald Trump borders on the legally obscene: an openly political prosecution based on a theory even legal pundits dismiss. Yet Monday the prosecution seemed to actually make a case for obscenity. It wasn’t the gratuitous introduction of an uncharged alleged tryst with a former Playboy Bunny or expected details on the relationship with an ex-porn star,” Turley wrote.

“The prosecution must show Trump falsified business records in ‘furtherance of another crime.’ After months of confusion on just what crime underpinned the indictment, the prosecution offered a new theory so ambiguous and undefined, it would have made Stewart blush. Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass told the jury that in listing payments to Stormy Daniels as a ‘legal expense,’ Trump violated this New York law: ‘Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties there to, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,’” Turley added.

In essence, Trump allegedly committed a crime by paying to quash a potentially embarrassing story and then reimbursing his lawyer, Michael Cohen, with other legal expenses to unlawfully promote his own candidacy.

Turley then detailed the absurdity of the charges:

It’s not a crime to pay for the nondisclosure of an alleged affair. It’s also not a federal election offense (the other underlying crime Bragg alleges) to pay such money as a personal or legal expense. Federal law doesn’t treat it as a political contribution to yourself.

Yet somehow the characterization of this payment as a legal expense is an illegal conspiracy to promote one’s own candidacy in New York.

In New York, prosecutors are expected to have extreme legal myopia: They can see no farther than Trump to the exclusion of any implication for the legal system or legal ethics. Of course, neither Bragg nor his office has ever seen this type of criminal case in any other defendant. Ever.

We’ve never seen a case like this one where a dead misdemeanor from 2016 could be revived as a felony just before the 2024 election. The statute of limitations for this case’s misdemeanors, including falsifying payments, has expired. But Bragg (with the help of counsel and former top Biden Justice Department official Matthew Colangelo) zapped it back to life by alleging a federal election crime that the Justice Department itself rejected as a basis for any criminal charge.

Turley wrote: “Besides running for president, Trump was married and had hosted a hit television show. There were ample reasons to secure an NDA to bury the story. Even if it was done with the election in mind, it is not unusual or illegal. There is generally no need to list such payments as a campaign contribution because the federal government doesn’t see them as a campaign contribution.”

“Everything about this case is, in my view, legally absurd. You know, this case is basically a state misdemeanor that had run out under the statute of limitations,” Turley added.

“Bragg was forced, after he declined for a long time to bring this charge, to do so. His predecessor rejected it. So they took a dead misdemeanor and bootstrapped it into effectively trying a federal crime. But the federal crime here under election law was rejected under the Department of Justice,” Turley continued.

The post Legal Expert Rips Apart DA Alvin Bragg’s Charges Against Trump appeared first on Conservative Brief.