Former federal prosecutor, Alex Little, slammed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s handling of the case against former President Donald Trump, calling it “vindictive” and characteristic of prosecutors seeking to keep the statute of limitations alive.
According to Little, the decision to indict Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records, stemming from a $130,000 payout to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, is not uncommon in courtrooms across the country. He believes that Bragg’s actions are a deliberate attempt to target Trump and keep the case alive.
The former federal prosecutor also expressed concern over the selection process for the jury, stating that it will take a long time given Trump’s high profile. He believes that Judge Juan Merchan will be meticulous in ensuring that potential jurors have not already made up their minds about the case. Trump’s defense team will likely push for this as well, as every criminal defendant is entitled to a fair trial.
However, Little pointed out that Trump is not just any criminal defendant, but a “special” one due to his global fame. As one of the most well-known people in the world, Little believes that Trump’s case will face even greater challenges in finding an unbiased jury.
Bragg’s actions have raised concerns about the fairness and impartiality of the case against Trump. Many believe that the district attorney has a personal vendetta against the former president, leading him to take aggressive and highly public actions.
The decision to charge Trump with felonies instead of misdemeanors is seen by many as an example of this vindictive approach. By turning minor offenses into more serious charges, Bragg is prolonging the case and causing unnecessary stress and financial burden on Trump.
Furthermore, Little also criticized Bragg for his handling of the case’s timing. The indictment was secured in March 2023, just months after Bragg took office as the Manhattan district attorney. Many believe that this rushed timeline shows Bragg’s eagerness to target Trump without a thorough review of the evidence.
Ultimately, Little’s comments call into question the actions and motivations of the Manhattan district attorney. By exhibiting a clear bias against Trump, Bragg has compromised the integrity and fairness of the case. Little’s assessment only adds to the growing criticism of Bragg’s tenure as district attorney and raises serious doubts about the legitimacy of the charges against Trump.