Famed lawyer and legal expert Alan Dershowitz has recently shared his thoughts on the case against former President Donald Trump, brought forward by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. According to Dershowitz, not only is the case “absurd and politically motivated,” but Bragg could also be disbarred for his actions.
Speaking with DW’s Tim Sebastian, Dershowitz explained that Trump will not receive a fair trial in Manhattan, given that the judges and prosecutors in New York lean to the Left politically.
He went on to say that things could potentially get difficult for Bragg if he uses former Trump attorney Michael Cohen as a witness at the trial, which is scheduled to begin in December.
Dershowitz argues that Robert Costello’s comments have proven that the main witness, Cohen, is going to be a “perjuring liar” on the witness stand, putting the district attorney in a terrible position.
“If he uses Cohen as a witness, he could actually lose his bar license. It’s unethical to put a witness on the stand who you know is lying, and he has to know that Cohen will be lying. Or he tries the case without Cohen, which would be very difficult, or he does the right thing: he drops the case,” said Dershowitz.
Last month, Dershowitz made a similar argument on Fox News, stating that Bragg could face up to five years in prison if found guilty of leaking details of Trump’s indictment to the media. Leaking grand jury testimony to the public is a Class E felony in New York and carries a prison sentence between one and five years.
Dershowitz further commented on the potential damage Michael Cohen could cause as a witness in the case. “If he uses Cohen as a witness, he could actually lose his bar license. It’s unethical to put a witness on the stand who you know is lying, and he has to know that Cohen will be lying. Or he tries the case without Cohen, which would be very difficult, or he does the right thing: he drops the case,” he said.
In an op-ed for The New York Sun, Dershowitz also stated that whoever leaked the sealed indictment is the person guilty of the only felony, in his opinion, in this case. He went on to criticize Bragg for not investigating the leak, suggesting that Bragg is too busy making up a crime against Trump rather than investigating a real crime that took place on his watch.
Dershowitz’s analysis points out the flaws in Bragg’s theory that Trump should have disclosed why he paid for a non-disclosure agreement to adult film star Stormy Daniels, which would defeat the purpose of the non-disclosure agreement. He also argues that the misdemeanor allegation involving false entries is unprecedented, represents selective prosecution, and is most likely barred by the two-year statute of limitations.
With these arguments in mind, it is clear that the case against former President Trump is fraught with political motivation and questionable actions by the district attorney. Dershowitz’s insights serve as a reminder to remain vigilant against the abuse of power for political gain.