“A curious omission” noted in Donald Trump’s indictment: “What kind of prankster clown wrote that?”

As every armchair legal scholar has learned since the indictment saga of former President Donald Trump, being charged with falsifying business records in New York State is a misdemeanor that rises to the level of a misdemeanor. criminal offense when it is done to cover up a crime.

This led many observers to see 34 accounts indictment against Trump, who never hinted at this other crime, to respond in the spirit of the famous 1984 ad for Wendy used to help sink Democrat Gary Hart’s presidential chances: “Where’s the beef?”

Commentator Dan Bongino went to Fox News to ponder the question, “What kind of prankster clown wrote this?”

.@dbongino: 1% of me thought Alvin Bragg couldn’t be that dumb, but I read the indictment and it was even worse than we thought. They made it all up. If you blacked out Trump’s name, any professional lawyer would read it and say, “What kind of prankster clown wrote that?” pic.twitter.com/93O0XzdeiV

— Jesse Watters (@JesseBWatters) April 5, 2023

Many on Twitter also noted as a “curious omission” the lack of any specific information. law what was broken.

The indictment is legally insufficient at first glance. New York State law does not make it a crime to influence an election. Federal law also does not make it a crime. Maybe that’s why the indictment doesn’t actually mention any law. Not enough facts. #TrumpArrangement https://t.co/CbOj27v41v

— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) April 4, 2023

What exactly could be the second crime they tried to cover up when Cohen paid out of his own money to keep quiet a porn star who now owes Trump thousands of dollars for losing lawsuits against him? If it’s campaign finance, remember that the FEC refused to go after Trump.

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) April 4, 2023

Alvin Bragg is a national disgrace. This is ridiculous at first glance.

— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) April 4, 2023

John Bolton on Alvin Bragg’s indictment: “It’s even weaker than I feared and I think it could easily lead to Trump being dismissed or quickly acquitted.”pic.twitter.com/K8Cbw8d6Ru

— ALKS (@alx) April 4, 2023

Barr said on Fox News that there is nothing here. Jarrett says the same. Where is the crime??? It’s copy and paste 34 times. That’s a bad joke! And they want to start testing in January 2024, at the height of the election season?! Bragg needs to be replaced.

— dele (@deb_helf) April 4, 2023

District Attorney of Manhattan Alvin Bragg did not explain the accusation.

“I’m not going to go into our process of discussing what was brought in. The charges that were brought were those that were brought. Evidence and law are the basis for such decisions.” – Bragg told reporters Tuesday.

“The indictment does not specify, because the law does not require it,” he said.

Fictional crimes

— Joe Wallin (@joewallin) April 4, 2023

During press questions, Bragg was just asked about a specific law and stated that he didn’t need to quote the law!

— Maria Lounds Seveli (@mlsline) April 4, 2023

Great catch. It’s hard to include breaking the law when there isn’t one.

— Murray (@Rothbard1776) April 4, 2023

IN scourging Bragg in an article for Fox News, Legal scholar Jonathan Turley noted that the New York Attorney “insisted on convicting Trump for the ‘crime of promoting [political] candidates by illegal means. He insists that he will prove “attempts to violate state and federal election laws.”

“The indictment seems to address the lack of legal precedent and the lack of specificity regarding the underlying ‘secondary’ felony,” Turley wrote.

“Bragg did nothing but repeat the same flawed theory dozens of times,” he said. “This is where mathematics and jurisprudence meet. If you multiply any number by zero, it will still be zero.”