Bragg Needs a Fool

Alvin Bragg, Manhattan District Attorney and whole-hearted embracer of the modern policy of non-prosecution that's giving free passes to low-level criminals, appears by many reports on the verge of indicting Donald Trump for a "crime" that others deemed unprosecutable.

Per my understanding, Bragg's assertion is that Trump's payment of hush money to Stormy Daniels represented campaign spending, and therefore his failure to report it is a violation of campaign finance law. That there are numerous problems with this claim is an understatement. The payment took place before Trump declared his candidacy. The payment would have to be interpreted as exclusively for political purposes - his reputation as a public figure and the fact of his marriage would have to be irrelevant. There's also apparently a two year statute of limitations at play... and the whole thing would be a misdemeanor - the sort of thing that Bragg routinely non-prosecutes in his jurisdiction. That he's trying to elevate it, apparently via the "ham sandwich" principle, to felony status only further justifies the conclusion that this is all politics, and virtually no "law." Neither the DoJ nor the FEC elected to charge Trump on this matter, by the way.

An indictment alone would be a massive gift to Trump, who wouldn't even have to bother actively leveraging it to tell the tale of the Left's excesses and usurpation/politicization of the justice system.

That's the head-scratcher. As many have reported, of all the things to chase Trump on, legally, this is the flimsiest and most politically blatant. I and others are left concluding that this is all about Bragg and the passel of TDS mouth-foamers in his circle. Rashida Tlaib's declaration, "We’re going to impeach this [redacted]!" echoes through my head.

In times of yore, kings would employ "fools," aka court jesters, whose job was to speak uncomfortable truths under the cover of humor, and thereby advise kings of their own follies, excesses, and missteps where and when more plain-speaking counselors dared not. Sycophancy and echo-chambers are not conducive to clear thought and rational decisions.

Where is Bragg's fool? Where the person who'd tell him "this is a bad idea and will very likely backfire in a spectacular way?"

I could see some Machiavellian schemer figuring "let's get Trump nominated because he's an easier beat than DeSantis" and figuring the reactive outrage to this farce would further that end. Such a schemer must, however, recognize the risk of this carrying over to the general election, especially with the Biden family scandals on the verge of boiling over, and actually carrying Trump into the White House. A Machiavellian would instead, IMO, work to undermine Trump's opponents (as is already happening with DeSantis) to get him nominated without giving him general-election fodder, so I'm prepared to discount the possibility of this being part of a long-con by Bragg. I also discount the notion that this is all intended to shift the news away from those Biden scandals, for the same reasons.

Simplest answer? Bragg wants to be the one to bag the orange whale, full stop, and thus cement his place in progressive canon. No matter the improbability of landing Moby Trump with this pea-shooter of a charge, no matter the likelihood of sinking the Democratic ship in 2024.

Without a court jester daring to tell him "bad idea, boss," it's left to the party's bigger fish to quash his self-aggrandizing ambition here. If he goes through with it, and Trump wins the WH in 2024, he will be flayed and his pelt hung over the Democrats' mantel, for they are demonstrably quick to turn on those who fail them.

Meanwhile, those of us who want the progressives newspaper-snouted but want Trump to go away as well are left pulling our hair out, lamenting "not again" as the Left gives Trump even more free press and even more "I'm your martyr" ammunition.