New York Attorney General Letitia James announced that the state’s legal efforts against Trump will take a backseat to the DOJ case. This announcement was only a day after Donald Trump was formally arrested and arraigned on 37 federal charges.
“In all likelihood, I believe that my case, as well as DA Bragg and the Georgia case, will, unfortunately, have to be adjourned pending the outcome of the federal case,” James said in a podcast interview.
I AM AN INNOCENT MAN. THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS TOTALLY CORRUPT. THIS IS ELECTION INTERFERENCE & A CONTINUATION OF THE GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF ALL TIME. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!! pic.twitter.com/kQxMDBBLTM
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) June 9, 2023
“So it all depends upon the scheduling of this particular case. I know there’s gonna be a flood, a flurry of motions, motion to dismiss, discovery issues, all of that. So it really all depends. Obviously, all of us want to know what Judge Cannon is going to do and whether or not she’s going to delay this particular case,” She continued.
James has been extremely vocal about her desire to investigate and prosecute Trump. She even campaigned on the promise of going after the former president. However, her office has been unable to find a crime to pin on Trump.
It's time to end Alvin Bragg's witch hunt against President Trump!https://t.co/z7Vsn4FsKH
— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) June 15, 2023
The Manhattan D.A. has used COVID-era policies to expand the statute of limitations on an administrative payment error to bring legal action against the former president. Bragg is seeking felony charges but what he has brought against Trump is generally a misdemeanor. Bragg upgraded the charge to a felony, citing a “conspiracy” to commit another crime. However, the other crime has never been specified by Bragg or his office, leading many to believe that Bragg is on a witch hunt against his political foes.
New Poll Shows Overwhelming Majority of Republicans Believe Trump Indictment to be Political Stunt https://t.co/JqiMRdtMrP
— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) June 15, 2023
“He used this analogy: If a person was accused of a bank robbery, instead of charging him with robbing one bank, the prosecutor would load up 33 other charges, such as ‘he crossed the street against the red light, was double parked, shot off his gun, and he carried a gun when he shouldn’t,’” John Banzhaf III, a professor emeritus at George Washington University Law School, said in an interview with the Epoch Times.
“I think even a jury which may not have too much legal expertise is going to look over at this and say, ‘Well, this is repetitious,’” Banzhaf concluded.
