Trump Team Rejects Bragg’s Alternative Plan
As President-elect Donald Trump inches closer to returning to the White House, his legal team is once again fighting back against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s ongoing efforts to uphold a controversial criminal conviction. Trump’s attorneys have strongly criticized Bragg’s latest filings, calling one of his proposals “unhinged” and “absurd.”
At the heart of the dispute is a Manhattan jury’s conviction of Trump on 34 felony counts related to the 2016 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. The jury found that Trump falsified business records to conceal the payment, allegedly to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Trump has denied any wrongdoing, including claims of an affair with Daniels, and has insisted that the legal case is politically motivated.
Bragg, in a recent filing, suggested that the court might consider alternative ways to keep the jury’s verdict intact, even if the case were dismissed. One such suggestion was that the judge treat the case as if Trump had died, thereby terminating the proceedings while leaving the conviction in place. Trump’s legal team, led by attorneys Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, blasted this idea, labeling it “absurd” and accusing Bragg’s office of grasping at straws in an attempt to save face.
In a pointed response, Trump’s lawyers argued that Bragg’s proposals were politically motivated, aimed at bolstering the district attorney’s reelection prospects ahead of 2025. The attorneys also made the case that such actions are an overreach of the judiciary, an attack on the executive branch, and an attempt to undermine the will of the people. They compared Bragg’s actions to “weaponizing the judiciary” for political gain, a sentiment echoed by Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, who recently suggested Trump might deserve a pardon.
This ongoing battle is part of a larger strategy by Trump’s legal team to have all of his criminal cases, including charges in Georgia and federal cases related to election interference, dismissed. The former president’s legal argument centers on his unique position as a president-elect, claiming that he is entitled to the same protections against criminal prosecution as a sitting president.
As this case moves forward, Trump’s defenders maintain that these charges are politically motivated and a clear attempt to derail his political comeback. The outcome of this legal saga will have significant implications, not only for Trump’s personal future but also for the broader fight over the weaponization of the justice system in America’s deeply polarized political climate.
